COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Section 153C jurisdiction requires timely deemed search and assessee-specific satisfaction material; otherwise reassessment must use the proper statut...
CESTAT appellate proceedings involving seized gold bars. Tribunal found insufficient evidence to prove foreign origin of gold, with purity ranging 995.7 to 998.9. Revenue failed to establish 'reasonable belief' of smuggling under Customs Act. Seizure deemed improper as appellant falls under Section 123(1)(a)(i) as possessor. Tribunal directed opportunity for cross-examination of initial seizure officers and remanded case for fresh adjudication, requiring Adjudicating Authority to comprehensively reassess evidence. Appeal disposed with directions to conduct detailed reexamination, potentially leading to return of seized gold to appellant.
CESTAT appellate proceedings involving seized gold bars. Tribunal found insufficient evidence to prove foreign origin of gold, with purity ranging 995.7 to 998.9. Revenue failed to establish 'reasonable belief' of smuggling under Customs Act. Seizure deemed improper as appellant falls under Section 123(1)(a)(i) as possessor. Tribunal directed opportunity for cross-examination of initial seizure officers and remanded case for fresh adjudication, requiring Adjudicating Authority to comprehensively reassess evidence. Appeal disposed with directions to conduct detailed reexamination, potentially leading to return of seized gold to appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
