Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Misuse of Advance Authorisation for export of garments - Diversion of imported goods into open market without using the same in export goods - The Tribunal upheld the denial of benefit under Customs Notification No. 99/2009 due to overwhelming evidence of diversion of imported goods into the open market. The CESTAT noted the failure of the appellant to fulfill export obligations as required. - The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument regarding the violation of principles of natural justice. It noted that the Department partly acceded to the request for cross-examination, and the appellant's lack of cooperation during investigations weakened their claim.
Misuse of Advance Authorisation for export of garments - Diversion of imported goods into open market without using the same in export goods - The Tribunal upheld the denial of benefit under Customs Notification No. 99/2009 due to overwhelming evidence of diversion of imported goods into the open market. The CESTAT noted the failure of the appellant to fulfill export obligations as required. - The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument regarding the violation of principles of natural justice. It noted that the Department partly acceded to the request for cross-examination, and the appellant's lack of cooperation during investigations weakened their claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.