Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed appellants' appeals, setting aside customs duty demand and penalty. The tribunal found no sustainable evidence of undervaluation, non-compliance with notification requirements, or procedural irregularities. Electronic evidence and investigation statements were deemed inadmissible due to non-compliance with Sections 138B and 138C of Customs Act. The tribunal ordered refund of Rs. 1,21,73,905/- paid during investigation within 60 days, effectively exonerating the appellants of all charges related to customs duty evasion and undervaluation.
CESTAT allowed appellants' appeals, setting aside customs duty demand and penalty. The tribunal found no sustainable evidence of undervaluation, non-compliance with notification requirements, or procedural irregularities. Electronic evidence and investigation statements were deemed inadmissible due to non-compliance with Sections 138B and 138C of Customs Act. The tribunal ordered refund of Rs. 1,21,73,905/- paid during investigation within 60 days, effectively exonerating the appellants of all charges related to customs duty evasion and undervaluation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
