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 the confiscation, redemption fine and penalty imposed under Sections 111(b) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held the Department failed to adduce corroborative evidence establishing foreign origin or illegal importation of the seized dry dates; expert testing lacked probative value and third-party trader opinions based on naked-eye inspection constituted inadmissible hearsay. The record did not disclose any inquiry or material justifying a belief that the consignment contravened the relevant notification, rendering the seizure and consequent punitive measures founded on assumption and presumption. No liability under Section 112(b) was established against the appellant.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the confiscation, redemption fine and penalty imposed under Sections 111(b) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held the Department failed to adduce corroborative evidence establishing foreign origin or illegal importation of the seized dry dates; expert testing lacked probative value and third-party trader opinions based on naked-eye inspection constituted inadmissible hearsay. The record did not disclose any inquiry or material justifying a belief that the consignment contravened the relevant notification, rendering the seizure and consequent punitive measures founded on assumption and presumption. No liability under Section 112(b) was established against the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.