Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
HC allowed the petition. It held that non-granting of opportunity to cross-examine witnesses whose statements were relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority to impose penalty u/s 74(9) of the CGST Act violated principles of natural justice. The HC observed that Section 107(11) of the Act does not empower the Appellate Authority to remand the case for such violations, necessitating invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
HC allowed the petition. It held that non-granting of opportunity to cross-examine witnesses whose statements were relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority to impose penalty u/s 74(9) of the CGST Act violated principles of natural justice. The HC observed that Section 107(11) of the Act does not empower the Appellate Authority to remand the case for such violations, necessitating invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.