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...
The appeals relate to confiscation of Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) licenses and Telegraphic Release Advices (TRAs), and demands of customs duty u/s 28(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, along with penalties u/ss 112(a) and 114(A). The CESTAT dismissed appeals by importers and traders, holding that the TRAs and DEPBs were forged and fabricated instruments. The High Court affirmed that there can be no credit derived from forged scrips, and the liability for duty, interest, and statutory consequences is unavoidable. The factual findings by authorities were upheld as no perversity was found. Penalties on importers were restored to 50% in line with traders/brokers. The Settlement Commission's orders for co-noticees who approached it cannot be extended to other co-noticees who did not approach it, as the 'case' u/s 127-B relates only to the declarant and not all co-noticees in common proceedings.
The appeals relate to confiscation of Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) licenses and Telegraphic Release Advices (TRAs), and demands of customs duty u/s 28(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, along with penalties u/ss 112(a) and 114(A). The CESTAT dismissed appeals by importers and traders, holding that the TRAs and DEPBs were forged and fabricated instruments. The High Court affirmed that there can be no credit derived from forged scrips, and the liability for duty, interest, and statutory consequences is unavoidable. The factual findings by authorities were upheld as no perversity was found. Penalties on importers were restored to 50% in line with traders/brokers. The Settlement Commission's orders for co-noticees who approached it cannot be extended to other co-noticees who did not approach it, as the 'case' u/s 127-B relates only to the declarant and not all co-noticees in common proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
