Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
The appellant availed duty exemption under EPCG authorization for import of goods. Subsequently, the appellant remitted customs duty along with interest on 27.03.2024 under the Amnesty Scheme. The CESTAT held that since the appellant had remitted the duty and interest as per the Amnesty Scheme, there was no scope to confirm the penalty imposed for the alleged violation. Although the appellant disputed the leviability of penalty u/s 112(a), the CESTAT found that the Amnesty Scheme did not specify anything about the penalty. Consequently, the CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
The appellant availed duty exemption under EPCG authorization for import of goods. Subsequently, the appellant remitted customs duty along with interest on 27.03.2024 under the Amnesty Scheme. The CESTAT held that since the appellant had remitted the duty and interest as per the Amnesty Scheme, there was no scope to confirm the penalty imposed for the alleged violation. Although the appellant disputed the leviability of penalty u/s 112(a), the CESTAT found that the Amnesty Scheme did not specify anything about the penalty. Consequently, the CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
