Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Levy of penalty - The appellant had, undisputedly, mis-declared the quantity of the goods imported in the Bill of Entry dated 9.2.2010. - Further, in respect of four of the past Bills of Entry, the values declared by the exporter before the Chinese authorities was much higher than the values declared in the Bills of Entry by the appellant - Demand with penalty confirmed - AT
Levy of penalty - The appellant had, undisputedly, mis-declared the quantity of the goods imported in the Bill of Entry dated 9.2.2010. - Further, in respect of four of the past Bills of Entry, the values declared by the exporter before the Chinese authorities was much higher than the values declared in the Bills of Entry by the appellant - Demand with penalty confirmed - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
