Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
Penalty u/s 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 was levied against appellants, Customs House Agents (CHAs), for not exercising due diligence. The allegation was that appellants facilitated fraudulent export and availed undue drawback by not verifying exporters' antecedents. However, it was held that the act of not being diligent in verifying exporters' antecedents attracts provisions of CBLR, 2018, not penalty u/s 117. The Tribunal had previously ruled that penalty for not verifying exporter's KYC cannot be sustained. Consequently, the penalty imposed on appellants u/s 117 was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Penalty u/s 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 was levied against appellants, Customs House Agents (CHAs), for not exercising due diligence. The allegation was that appellants facilitated fraudulent export and availed undue drawback by not verifying exporters' antecedents. However, it was held that the act of not being diligent in verifying exporters' antecedents attracts provisions of CBLR, 2018, not penalty u/s 117. The Tribunal had previously ruled that penalty for not verifying exporter's KYC cannot be sustained. Consequently, the penalty imposed on appellants u/s 117 was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
