Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The CESTAT held that the vessel in question was a foreign-going vessel during its voyage between two Indian ports and thus, consumption of bunker fuel and stores was exempt from Customs duty under Section 87 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's payment of duty and filing of Bill of Entry, allegedly under Customs officers' direction, did not convert the nature of the voyage into a coastal run. The Tribunal found the demand of differential Customs duty and penalty under Section 114A unsustainable, as the Commissioner erred in disregarding relevant facts and relying solely on procedural compliance. The penalty and differential duty demand of Rs. 96,136 along with interest were set aside. The appeal was allowed, affirming that there was no intention to evade duty and the vessel's operation aligned with established legal precedents distinguishing foreign-going vessels from coastal runs.
The CESTAT held that the vessel in question was a foreign-going vessel during its voyage between two Indian ports and thus, consumption of bunker fuel and stores was exempt from Customs duty under Section 87 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's payment of duty and filing of Bill of Entry, allegedly under Customs officers' direction, did not convert the nature of the voyage into a coastal run. The Tribunal found the demand of differential Customs duty and penalty under Section 114A unsustainable, as the Commissioner erred in disregarding relevant facts and relying solely on procedural compliance. The penalty and differential duty demand of Rs. 96,136 along with interest were set aside. The appeal was allowed, affirming that there was no intention to evade duty and the vessel's operation aligned with established legal precedents distinguishing foreign-going vessels from coastal runs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
