Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
CESTAT held that the impugned service-tax demand, founded solely on CBDT data without independent corroborative evidence from service-tax records, was unsustainable; mere entries in income-tax filings do not establish liability under the Finance Act. The Tribunal found the appellants rendered arranging-transport services but did not issue consignment notes, and therefore the receipts fell within the negative list exclusion (s.66D(P)(i)(A)); accordingly the service was not taxable as GTA. Suppression with intent to evade tax was not established, so the extended period of limitation could not be invoked. Consequent demands of service tax, interest and penalty were set aside and the appeal was allowed.
CESTAT held that the impugned service-tax demand, founded solely on CBDT data without independent corroborative evidence from service-tax records, was unsustainable; mere entries in income-tax filings do not establish liability under the Finance Act. The Tribunal found the appellants rendered arranging-transport services but did not issue consignment notes, and therefore the receipts fell within the negative list exclusion (s.66D(P)(i)(A)); accordingly the service was not taxable as GTA. Suppression with intent to evade tax was not established, so the extended period of limitation could not be invoked. Consequent demands of service tax, interest and penalty were set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
