Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
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 
