Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
The appellant imported pneumatic tyres without the mandatory Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) markings, violating the provisions of the BIS Act and the Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes of Automatic Vehicles (Quality Control) Order, 2009. The imported tyres were held to be "prohibited goods" u/s 2(33) of the Customs Act, 1962, liable for confiscation u/s 111. The appellant also mis-declared the quantity, quality, and valuation of the imported goods. The Tribunal upheld the absolute confiscation of the goods, imposition of penalties u/ss 112(a)(i) and 114AA of the Customs Act, and rejected the appellant's plea for redemption of the goods, citing public safety concerns and the risk of the goods falling into unauthorized hands.
The appellant imported pneumatic tyres without the mandatory Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) markings, violating the provisions of the BIS Act and the Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes of Automatic Vehicles (Quality Control) Order, 2009. The imported tyres were held to be "prohibited goods" u/s 2(33) of the Customs Act, 1962, liable for confiscation u/s 111. The appellant also mis-declared the quantity, quality, and valuation of the imported goods. The Tribunal upheld the absolute confiscation of the goods, imposition of penalties u/ss 112(a)(i) and 114AA of the Customs Act, and rejected the appellant's plea for redemption of the goods, citing public safety concerns and the risk of the goods falling into unauthorized hands.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
