Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
Denial of benefit of Value Based Advance Licenses (VABAL) to the appellants-transferees and the recovery of customs duty, along with the imposition of penalties. The key points are: The DGFT authorities took action on certain licenses, but there was no indication of cancellation by them for the three VABAL licenses in question. The impugned order directing duty recovery has no legal basis and is contrary to CBEC instructions. The Tribunal held that since the VABAL licenses were not obtained through fraud, the ratio of the Supreme Court case involving forged documents does not apply. The DGFT authorities issued amendments for the three licenses, indicating they were not found to involve forgery. Precedents establish that if licenses were valid at import time, subsequent cancellation on fraud grounds does not impact the transferee. The benefit of notification cannot be denied to the transferee on the ground of breach of conditions. Consequently, the impugned order confirming demands, interest, and penalties is unsustainable, and the appeal is allowed.
Denial of benefit of Value Based Advance Licenses (VABAL) to the appellants-transferees and the recovery of customs duty, along with the imposition of penalties. The key points are: The DGFT authorities took action on certain licenses, but there was no indication of cancellation by them for the three VABAL licenses in question. The impugned order directing duty recovery has no legal basis and is contrary to CBEC instructions. The Tribunal held that since the VABAL licenses were not obtained through fraud, the ratio of the Supreme Court case involving forged documents does not apply. The DGFT authorities issued amendments for the three licenses, indicating they were not found to involve forgery. Precedents establish that if licenses were valid at import time, subsequent cancellation on fraud grounds does not impact the transferee. The benefit of notification cannot be denied to the transferee on the ground of breach of conditions. Consequently, the impugned order confirming demands, interest, and penalties is unsustainable, and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
