Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96587 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 the appeal challenging revocation of customs broker license and forfeiture of security deposit under CBLR. The Tribunal held that disciplinary proceedings require proper evidence and departmental burden of proof was not discharged. Evidence consisted primarily of uncorroborated statements which failed prudent man test when refuted by appellant. Original authority reached conclusions without adequate proof, and in penal matters benefit of doubt must favor appellant. Facts were neither proved nor disproved under erstwhile Indian Evidence Act provisions. CESTAT emphasized its limited appellate role in disciplinary proceedings, intervening only where findings lack evidence, are illogical, procedurally improper, or shocking to conscience. Impugned order set aside.
CESTAT allowed the appeal challenging revocation of customs broker license and forfeiture of security deposit under CBLR. The Tribunal held that disciplinary proceedings require proper evidence and departmental burden of proof was not discharged. Evidence consisted primarily of uncorroborated statements which failed prudent man test when refuted by appellant. Original authority reached conclusions without adequate proof, and in penal matters benefit of doubt must favor appellant. Facts were neither proved nor disproved under erstwhile Indian Evidence Act provisions. CESTAT emphasized its limited appellate role in disciplinary proceedings, intervening only where findings lack evidence, are illogical, procedurally improper, or shocking to conscience. Impugned order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.