Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT Mumbai held that confiscation of imported goods and imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of Customs Act for forged Special Import Licenses lacked clear evidence linking appellants to forgery. Delay in penalty proceedings beyond reasonable time was deemed unjustified, citing legal precedents. The order confiscating goods was upheld, but penalty imposition was deemed unsustainable. Appeal allowed in part, emphasizing lack of strong grounds for penalty imposition u/s 112(a) on appellants.
CESTAT Mumbai held that confiscation of imported goods and imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of Customs Act for forged Special Import Licenses lacked clear evidence linking appellants to forgery. Delay in penalty proceedings beyond reasonable time was deemed unjustified, citing legal precedents. The order confiscating goods was upheld, but penalty imposition was deemed unsustainable. Appeal allowed in part, emphasizing lack of strong grounds for penalty imposition u/s 112(a) on appellants.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
