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...
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 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
