Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Allegations of clandestine removal of polished vitrified tiles and evasion of duty were primarily based on private documents/records recovered from premises of M/s K.N. Brothers/Shree Ambaji Enterprises, Shroff, and office of Shri Pravin Shirvi, Broker/middlemen. CESTAT held that opportunity of cross-examination was not provided, violating principles of natural justice. Reliability of statements was doubtful as there were discrepancies in amounts mentioned. Cross-examination of witnesses is mandatory u/s 9D of the Act. Untested statements of third parties cannot be sole basis for adverse conclusion against assessee. Positive and tangible evidence is required to establish clandestine removal, not assumptions and presumptions. Entire demand was theoretical and theoretical. Impugned order set aside and appeal allowed.
Allegations of clandestine removal of polished vitrified tiles and evasion of duty were primarily based on private documents/records recovered from premises of M/s K.N. Brothers/Shree Ambaji Enterprises, Shroff, and office of Shri Pravin Shirvi, Broker/middlemen. CESTAT held that opportunity of cross-examination was not provided, violating principles of natural justice. Reliability of statements was doubtful as there were discrepancies in amounts mentioned. Cross-examination of witnesses is mandatory u/s 9D of the Act. Untested statements of third parties cannot be sole basis for adverse conclusion against assessee. Positive and tangible evidence is required to establish clandestine removal, not assumptions and presumptions. Entire demand was theoretical and theoretical. Impugned order set aside and appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.