Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Independent professional certification requires pleaded knowledge or complicity for criminal liability; untimely complaints remain barred by limitatio...
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.