Section 54 construction relief survives pre-transfer commencement when completion occurs within the statutory period, excluding ineligible spouse-owne...
Fraud classification show-cause notices founded on inconclusive forensic audit material cannot sustain action, permitting fresh proceedings on conclus...
Appellate enhancement limits protect against new income sources, while documented credits and prior-year investments resist unexplained-income additio...
Page of 4897
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 97923 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.