Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3461 to 3480 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Tribunal held that since the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 were not followed, the goods cannot be considered prohibited, and consequently, cannot be absolutely confiscated. The valuation adopted by the Revenue by taking the price of original branded goods from an e-commerce site was incorrect as the goods were counterfeit. Since the goods were not liable for absolute confiscation and the enhancement of value by the department was unacceptable, the entire penalties imposed against all the appellants were set aside. The appeal was allowed.
The Tribunal held that since the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 were not followed, the goods cannot be considered prohibited, and consequently, cannot be absolutely confiscated. The valuation adopted by the Revenue by taking the price of original branded goods from an e-commerce site was incorrect as the goods were counterfeit. Since the goods were not liable for absolute confiscation and the enhancement of value by the department was unacceptable, the entire penalties imposed against all the appellants were set aside. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.