Petition dismissed; petitioner allowed to submit detailed disclosures and documents for re-consideration; notices for 2019-23 may be adjudicated on me...
Confiscation and duty recovery quashed where licensing records show export obligation discharged; customs lacks jurisdiction absent licence annulment ...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10161 to 10180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT allowed the appeal in part, setting aside confirmation of penalties under s.77 and s.78(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal found the appellant had been granted personal hearing, had filed ST-3 returns and paid the re-determined service tax (including the s.35F pre-deposit as read with s.83), and that the proceedings were based on data furnished by the appellant to the Income Tax authorities. There was no evidence of deliberate suppression, fraud or collusion warranting invocation of the extended limitation proviso. In consequence, penalty imposition was held legally untenable and the impugned order modified accordingly.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal in part, setting aside confirmation of penalties under s.77 and s.78(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal found the appellant had been granted personal hearing, had filed ST-3 returns and paid the re-determined service tax (including the s.35F pre-deposit as read with s.83), and that the proceedings were based on data furnished by the appellant to the Income Tax authorities. There was no evidence of deliberate suppression, fraud or collusion warranting invocation of the extended limitation proviso. In consequence, penalty imposition was held legally untenable and the impugned order modified accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
