Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
The penalty imposed u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant (a Customs Broker) for abetting the clearance of undeclared/mis-declared export goods was reduced to Rs. 10,00,000/-. However, the penalty imposed u/s 114AA was set aside as the appellant was not responsible for forging any documents and the ingredients specified in Section 114AA were not present. The CESTAT held that the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 provide for penal action upon the Customs Broker for failing to fulfill obligations, and penal proceedings could have been initiated under the relevant provisions of the said Regulations.
The penalty imposed u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant (a Customs Broker) for abetting the clearance of undeclared/mis-declared export goods was reduced to Rs. 10,00,000/-. However, the penalty imposed u/s 114AA was set aside as the appellant was not responsible for forging any documents and the ingredients specified in Section 114AA were not present. The CESTAT held that the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 provide for penal action upon the Customs Broker for failing to fulfill obligations, and penal proceedings could have been initiated under the relevant provisions of the said Regulations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
