Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
CESTAT held that the appellant's claim of exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST fails because the recipient was a state government company and not a statutory authority created by statute; therefore the notification is inapplicable. The Tribunal affirmed invocation of the extended period of limitation, finding no complex questions and noting prior judicial determination of the recipient's status and contemporaneous evidence that service tax was paid only from October 2013, establishing intent to short-pay/evade tax. Penalty under section 78 was upheld; challenges to penalties under section 77(1)(a) and late fee under section 77(2) were not pursued. The appeal was dismissed.
CESTAT held that the appellant's claim of exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST fails because the recipient was a state government company and not a statutory authority created by statute; therefore the notification is inapplicable. The Tribunal affirmed invocation of the extended period of limitation, finding no complex questions and noting prior judicial determination of the recipient's status and contemporaneous evidence that service tax was paid only from October 2013, establishing intent to short-pay/evade tax. Penalty under section 78 was upheld; challenges to penalties under section 77(1)(a) and late fee under section 77(2) were not pursued. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
