Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT adjudicated a customs dispute involving 37.34 kg of saffron, finding procedural irregularities in stock verification. The tribunal rejected confiscation based on balance sheet assumptions, emphasizing the need for physical stock records. While identifying lapses in stock maintenance by the appellant, the tribunal partially modified penalties. The order reduced penalties under Sections 114A and 112(b)(ii), imposing a token penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Section 117 for improper record-keeping. The tribunal ultimately held that stock verification must rely on actual physical records rather than presumptive calculations, thereby partially allowing the appellant's challenge to the original customs order.
CESTAT adjudicated a customs dispute involving 37.34 kg of saffron, finding procedural irregularities in stock verification. The tribunal rejected confiscation based on balance sheet assumptions, emphasizing the need for physical stock records. While identifying lapses in stock maintenance by the appellant, the tribunal partially modified penalties. The order reduced penalties under Sections 114A and 112(b)(ii), imposing a token penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Section 117 for improper record-keeping. The tribunal ultimately held that stock verification must rely on actual physical records rather than presumptive calculations, thereby partially allowing the appellant's challenge to the original customs order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.