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 CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that duty recovery and penalties were unauthorised because the second proviso to the Notification had been omitted during the relevant period, thereby removing the statutory condition requiring the intermediary to execute a bond obliging export of equivalent gold within 120 days. Consequently, the revenue could not validly enforce the bond or invoke section 28AA to recover customs duty with interest; any demand premised on non-fulfilment of the deleted proviso lacked legal authority. Statements obtained under section 108 were held irrelevant for liability, the 2009 circular inapplicable, and penalties under sections 112 and 114AA (and recovery against partners/managers) unsustainable.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that duty recovery and penalties were unauthorised because the second proviso to the Notification had been omitted during the relevant period, thereby removing the statutory condition requiring the intermediary to execute a bond obliging export of equivalent gold within 120 days. Consequently, the revenue could not validly enforce the bond or invoke section 28AA to recover customs duty with interest; any demand premised on non-fulfilment of the deleted proviso lacked legal authority. Statements obtained under section 108 were held irrelevant for liability, the 2009 circular inapplicable, and penalties under sections 112 and 114AA (and recovery against partners/managers) unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.