Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
The CESTAT allowed the appeal. The department wrongly rejected the declared assessable value of imports under four Bills of Entry. The re-determined value was unacceptable. The differential duty of Rs. 9,60,376/-, order of confiscation, and penalties were set aside. The appellant's statement, allegedly obtained under coercion, could not be solely relied upon to prove undervaluation in the absence of evidence of comparable imports. Principles of natural justice were violated by the ex-parte decision rejecting the declared value without sufficient evidence.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal. The department wrongly rejected the declared assessable value of imports under four Bills of Entry. The re-determined value was unacceptable. The differential duty of Rs. 9,60,376/-, order of confiscation, and penalties were set aside. The appellant's statement, allegedly obtained under coercion, could not be solely relied upon to prove undervaluation in the absence of evidence of comparable imports. Principles of natural justice were violated by the ex-parte decision rejecting the declared value without sufficient evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
