Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Legal issues regarding the recovery of IGST/customs duty, interest, redemption fine, and penalty in connection with imports made under the Advance Authorization scheme. It states that while provisions exist for recovering IGST u/s 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, there are no specific provisions for recovering interest, fine, and penalty under the same sections. The summary cites Supreme Court judgments emphasizing that interest and penalties can only be levied if the relevant statute expressly provides for it. It concludes that the orders for recovering interest, redemption fine, and penalty in these cases are unsustainable due to the absence of specific legal provisions. Additionally, it addresses the issue of time limitation, stating that the demand is time-barred as there was no suppression of facts, and the extended period u/s 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, cannot be invoked. Consequently, the CESTAT (Appellate Tribunal) set aside the impugned orders regarding interest, redemption fine, penalty, and confiscation of goods.
Legal issues regarding the recovery of IGST/customs duty, interest, redemption fine, and penalty in connection with imports made under the Advance Authorization scheme. It states that while provisions exist for recovering IGST u/s 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, there are no specific provisions for recovering interest, fine, and penalty under the same sections. The summary cites Supreme Court judgments emphasizing that interest and penalties can only be levied if the relevant statute expressly provides for it. It concludes that the orders for recovering interest, redemption fine, and penalty in these cases are unsustainable due to the absence of specific legal provisions. Additionally, it addresses the issue of time limitation, stating that the demand is time-barred as there was no suppression of facts, and the extended period u/s 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, cannot be invoked. Consequently, the CESTAT (Appellate Tribunal) set aside the impugned orders regarding interest, redemption fine, penalty, and confiscation of goods.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
