Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The HC allowed the revenue's appeal, set aside the CESTAT order and upheld the orders of the adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals), denying preferential tariff relief. The court held that entitlement under N/N.46/2011-Cus. requires a valid certificate of origin conforming to AIFTA Rules and that the importer bears the evidentiary burden. The AIFTA certificates were held unreliable: shipping records showed departure on 31.03.2014 while the invoices were dated 23.05.2014, and the certificate misidentified the third-party supplier, demonstrating material discrepancies that undermined authenticity. Tallying of quantities and vessel particulars could not substitute for a bona fide certificate; exemption therefore could not be granted.
The HC allowed the revenue's appeal, set aside the CESTAT order and upheld the orders of the adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals), denying preferential tariff relief. The court held that entitlement under N/N.46/2011-Cus. requires a valid certificate of origin conforming to AIFTA Rules and that the importer bears the evidentiary burden. The AIFTA certificates were held unreliable: shipping records showed departure on 31.03.2014 while the invoices were dated 23.05.2014, and the certificate misidentified the third-party supplier, demonstrating material discrepancies that undermined authenticity. Tallying of quantities and vessel particulars could not substitute for a bona fide certificate; exemption therefore could not be granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.