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 allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned orders to the extent they upheld demands of differential customs duty, interest and penalties. The Tribunal held that the transaction value declared at importation, which had been scrutinised and enhanced by the proper officer at assessment and clearance, could not be further re-determined absent cogent reasons prescribed under s.14 of the Customs Act and the Customs Valuation Rules. The Department failed to discharge the burden of proving under-valuation or illicit flowbacks; reliance primarily on a statement of a co-appellant was inadequate. Consequently, reassessment and penal consequences premised on purported suppression or misdeclaration were quashed.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned orders to the extent they upheld demands of differential customs duty, interest and penalties. The Tribunal held that the transaction value declared at importation, which had been scrutinised and enhanced by the proper officer at assessment and clearance, could not be further re-determined absent cogent reasons prescribed under s.14 of the Customs Act and the Customs Valuation Rules. The Department failed to discharge the burden of proving under-valuation or illicit flowbacks; reliance primarily on a statement of a co-appellant was inadequate. Consequently, reassessment and penal consequences premised on purported suppression or misdeclaration were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
