Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
Investigation revealed fraudulent Cenvat Credit claims involving fake invoices without actual supply of goods from April 2016 to June 2017. Evidence indicated non-supply of goods from various parties to M/s. Ridhi Sidhi. However, the department failed to establish non-supply of goods from M/s. Ridhi Sidhi to the appellants. Appellants produced documentary evidence including transport receipts, payment proofs, goods receipt proofs, and output records indicating actual receipt of goods. Department did not rebut this evidence with credible contrary proof. Department's stance was based on presumptions and assumptions. Failure to record statements of M/s. Ridhi Sidhi's proprietor/director/authorized person and denial of cross-examination opportunity weakened department's case. Cumulatively, department failed to establish a case against appellants, making them eligible for relief. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed by CESTAT (Appellate Tribunal).
Investigation revealed fraudulent Cenvat Credit claims involving fake invoices without actual supply of goods from April 2016 to June 2017. Evidence indicated non-supply of goods from various parties to M/s. Ridhi Sidhi. However, the department failed to establish non-supply of goods from M/s. Ridhi Sidhi to the appellants. Appellants produced documentary evidence including transport receipts, payment proofs, goods receipt proofs, and output records indicating actual receipt of goods. Department did not rebut this evidence with credible contrary proof. Department's stance was based on presumptions and assumptions. Failure to record statements of M/s. Ridhi Sidhi's proprietor/director/authorized person and denial of cross-examination opportunity weakened department's case. Cumulatively, department failed to establish a case against appellants, making them eligible for relief. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed by CESTAT (Appellate Tribunal).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
