Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The CESTAT held that statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act, without compliance with the mandatory procedural safeguards under section 138B, are inadmissible as evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) had relied solely on such statements by the appellant company's Director to determine undervaluation and misdeclaration of imported motorcycles. Given the failure to adhere to the prescribed procedure, the Tribunal found this reliance unjustified and quashed the impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) order dated October 23, 2012, was set aside, restoring the appellant's declared valuation and rejecting the reassessment based on the inadmissible statements.
The CESTAT held that statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act, without compliance with the mandatory procedural safeguards under section 138B, are inadmissible as evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) had relied solely on such statements by the appellant company's Director to determine undervaluation and misdeclaration of imported motorcycles. Given the failure to adhere to the prescribed procedure, the Tribunal found this reliance unjustified and quashed the impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) order dated October 23, 2012, was set aside, restoring the appellant's declared valuation and rejecting the reassessment based on the inadmissible statements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
