Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
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...
CESTAT dismissed the appeal involving denial of customs exemption under N/N. 84/97-Cus for imported Asphalt Batch Mix Plant from China. The appellant claimed exemption for project-funded machinery but officials admitted goods were not intended for permanent project use, resulting in project certificate cancellation. The tribunal held that conditional exemptions create continuing obligations, and fraud vitiates exemption claims. Despite valid project certificate at import, subsequent cancellation due to non-compliance with notification conditions constituted suppression of facts and fraudulent duty evasion. The tribunal upheld duty demand with interest under Section 28AA, invoked extended limitation period under Section 28(4) due to fraud, and imposed penalty finding blameworthy conduct and mens rea established through appellant's admissions.
CESTAT dismissed the appeal involving denial of customs exemption under N/N. 84/97-Cus for imported Asphalt Batch Mix Plant from China. The appellant claimed exemption for project-funded machinery but officials admitted goods were not intended for permanent project use, resulting in project certificate cancellation. The tribunal held that conditional exemptions create continuing obligations, and fraud vitiates exemption claims. Despite valid project certificate at import, subsequent cancellation due to non-compliance with notification conditions constituted suppression of facts and fraudulent duty evasion. The tribunal upheld duty demand with interest under Section 28AA, invoked extended limitation period under Section 28(4) due to fraud, and imposed penalty finding blameworthy conduct and mens rea established through appellant's admissions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
