Central Government rescinds 2017 notification creating 4.05-hectare SEZ at Ameenpur after developer de-notification request; state no-objection confir...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10901 to 10920 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
