Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Levy of penalty for abetting in mis-declaration of imported goods - Revocation of Courier License - The tribunal ruled that penalty under this section could only be imposed if no express penalty was provided elsewhere for the contravention. As penalty was already proposed under Regulation 14 of the Courier Import and Export Regulations, invoking Section 117 was deemed unsustainable. Moreover, as the appellant acted as a facilitator for customs transactions, and no illegality related to goods cleared through them was found, the tribunal held that penalty imposition was not justified. - Further, it found that the evidence did not support the allegations, and in some cases, the appellant had complied with the regulations. Therefore, the tribunal set aside the penalties imposed under Regulation 14 of the Courier Import and Export Regulations.
Levy of penalty for abetting in mis-declaration of imported goods - Revocation of Courier License - The tribunal ruled that penalty under this section could only be imposed if no express penalty was provided elsewhere for the contravention. As penalty was already proposed under Regulation 14 of the Courier Import and Export Regulations, invoking Section 117 was deemed unsustainable. Moreover, as the appellant acted as a facilitator for customs transactions, and no illegality related to goods cleared through them was found, the tribunal held that penalty imposition was not justified. - Further, it found that the evidence did not support the allegations, and in some cases, the appellant had complied with the regulations. Therefore, the tribunal set aside the penalties imposed under Regulation 14 of the Courier Import and Export Regulations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.