Reassessment under s.148A held valid; s.69 additions totaling Rs.7,00,000 deleted after acceptable contemporaneous explanations for property investmen...
Adjudication set aside; Rule 9 valuation based on internet engineer report quashed for Rule 3(4) non-compliance; Section 138B cross-examination requir...
CESTAT allows the appeal, sets aside the impugned order and remands the matter to the first appellate authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal found the impugned conditions and the reversal of the amendment unsustainable insofar as they rest on an undetermined premise whether the relevant bill of lading was "non-negotiable" and whether a no-objection or deemed-warehousing permission under ss. 47-49 and s.30 of the Customs Act was required or granted. The first appellate authority erred in deferring duty payment and regularizing retention without record of statutory permission and without first determining its competence and the nature of the bill of lading; those issues are to be decided afresh.
CESTAT allows the appeal, sets aside the impugned order and remands the matter to the first appellate authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal found the impugned conditions and the reversal of the amendment unsustainable insofar as they rest on an undetermined premise whether the relevant bill of lading was "non-negotiable" and whether a no-objection or deemed-warehousing permission under ss. 47-49 and s.30 of the Customs Act was required or granted. The first appellate authority erred in deferring duty payment and regularizing retention without record of statutory permission and without first determining its competence and the nature of the bill of lading; those issues are to be decided afresh.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
