Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
CESTAT affirmed that the imported de-humidifiers are classifiable under CTI 8509 80 00, not CTI 8479, because Chapter Note 1(f) to Ch.84 excludes goods falling within Ch.85 and Chapter Note 4 to Ch.85 confines the scope of CTH 8509. A demand issued under s.28 was validly invoked, including the extended limitation period, since the importer altered classification without notifying authorities and critical facts were concealed. The goods were held liable to confiscation under s.111(m). The penalty under s.114A on the importer was upheld as conditions for extended limitation and penalty coincide. The penalty proposed against the customs broker was set aside for lack of cogent evidence; the remainder of the adjudicatory order is sustained.
CESTAT affirmed that the imported de-humidifiers are classifiable under CTI 8509 80 00, not CTI 8479, because Chapter Note 1(f) to Ch.84 excludes goods falling within Ch.85 and Chapter Note 4 to Ch.85 confines the scope of CTH 8509. A demand issued under s.28 was validly invoked, including the extended limitation period, since the importer altered classification without notifying authorities and critical facts were concealed. The goods were held liable to confiscation under s.111(m). The penalty under s.114A on the importer was upheld as conditions for extended limitation and penalty coincide. The penalty proposed against the customs broker was set aside for lack of cogent evidence; the remainder of the adjudicatory order is sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
