Functional comparability governs selection of support-service and IT-enabled service comparables, with verification required for unresolved data and m...
Bank account freezing requires statutory authority; anti-money-laundering compliance and KYC monitoring do not permit unilateral indefinite restrictio...
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside a Rs.3,00,000 penalty imposed under s.112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held the appellant was neither owner nor party concerned with carriage or concealment of the foreign-origin garments, which were not covered by s.123 nor notified under s.11. The goods had been subjected to statutory physical examination, cleared on examination, and lawful possession and sale were supported by invoices, GST returns and Bills of Entry; ownership had transferred on sale. The Tribunal found no basis for imposition of s.112(b) penalty on the appellant and quashed the levy; appeal allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside a Rs.3,00,000 penalty imposed under s.112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held the appellant was neither owner nor party concerned with carriage or concealment of the foreign-origin garments, which were not covered by s.123 nor notified under s.11. The goods had been subjected to statutory physical examination, cleared on examination, and lawful possession and sale were supported by invoices, GST returns and Bills of Entry; ownership had transferred on sale. The Tribunal found no basis for imposition of s.112(b) penalty on the appellant and quashed the levy; appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
