Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Appellants challenged confiscation of containers, imposition of redemption fine, and penalty due to inordinate delay in adjudication. Tribunal found procedural lapse by appellants but acknowledged delay caused by department's hold on containers. 231 out of 236 containers exported before show cause notice. Tribunal ruled confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty on exported containers incorrect. However, duty payable on remaining 5 unexported containers and penalty of Rs. 50,000 u/s 112 of Customs Act imposed for infractions. Appeal partly allowed, confiscation and redemption fine on exported containers set aside.
Appellants challenged confiscation of containers, imposition of redemption fine, and penalty due to inordinate delay in adjudication. Tribunal found procedural lapse by appellants but acknowledged delay caused by department's hold on containers. 231 out of 236 containers exported before show cause notice. Tribunal ruled confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty on exported containers incorrect. However, duty payable on remaining 5 unexported containers and penalty of Rs. 50,000 u/s 112 of Customs Act imposed for infractions. Appeal partly allowed, confiscation and redemption fine on exported containers set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.