Penalty on exchange vacated for lack of evidence that exchange authorized subsidiaries' investments; Regulations 43(1) 2012 and 38(2) 2018 inapplicabl...
CESTAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the original authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the authority to consider the binding Mad. HC Division Bench view that delayed refunds attract interest under s.27A of the Customs Act, unless and until the Division Bench stay is vacated or the SC determines the point of law. The original authority must re-examine the claim in light of the Mad. HC pronouncement and relevant board instructions, afford the appellant a time-bound opportunity for oral and written submissions, and pass a speaking, reasoned order applying appropriate provisions of the Customs Act and principles of natural justice. Appeal disposed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the original authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the authority to consider the binding Mad. HC Division Bench view that delayed refunds attract interest under s.27A of the Customs Act, unless and until the Division Bench stay is vacated or the SC determines the point of law. The original authority must re-examine the claim in light of the Mad. HC pronouncement and relevant board instructions, afford the appellant a time-bound opportunity for oral and written submissions, and pass a speaking, reasoned order applying appropriate provisions of the Customs Act and principles of natural justice. Appeal disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
