Faceless assessment and registration procedures are updated through electronic communication, revised recovery rules, extended deadlines, and replacem...
Risk-based selective vessel boarding requires accurate declarations and preserves master and agent liability where physical inspections are not select...
Permanent-establishment reassessment cannot revisit scrutinised disclosures; extended reopening fails without undisclosed material facts and within st...
The case involved the scope for retention of penalty u/s 112 of Customs Act, 1962 after liability to confiscation was set aside. Confiscation pertains to goods, while penalty is on persons. Customs Act does not allow separate confiscation for individuals. The show cause notice alleged goods liable for confiscation u/s 111(o). Penalty u/s 112 applies only if a person contributed to the confiscation. Without confiscation, penalty cannot be imposed. Appeal allowed, nothing remains against the two individuals.
The case involved the scope for retention of penalty u/s 112 of Customs Act, 1962 after liability to confiscation was set aside. Confiscation pertains to goods, while penalty is on persons. Customs Act does not allow separate confiscation for individuals. The show cause notice alleged goods liable for confiscation u/s 111(o). Penalty u/s 112 applies only if a person contributed to the confiscation. Without confiscation, penalty cannot be imposed. Appeal allowed, nothing remains against the two individuals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
