Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT upheld the penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act against appellant for dealing with an imported motorcycle liable for confiscation. While appellant purchased the vehicle with temporary registration and later obtained permanent registration, they failed to exercise due diligence required when purchasing and subsequently selling an imported motorcycle. The Tribunal found appellant had reason to believe the motorcycle was liable for confiscation. However, considering the mitigating factor that section 114AA charges were dropped by the Adjudicating Authority, indicating appellant did not knowingly make false declarations, CESTAT reduced the penalty from Rs.25,000 to Rs.10,000. Appeal partially allowed.
CESTAT upheld the penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act against appellant for dealing with an imported motorcycle liable for confiscation. While appellant purchased the vehicle with temporary registration and later obtained permanent registration, they failed to exercise due diligence required when purchasing and subsequently selling an imported motorcycle. The Tribunal found appellant had reason to believe the motorcycle was liable for confiscation. However, considering the mitigating factor that section 114AA charges were dropped by the Adjudicating Authority, indicating appellant did not knowingly make false declarations, CESTAT reduced the penalty from Rs.25,000 to Rs.10,000. Appeal partially allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
