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 allowed the appeal in part, holding that the appellants remained liable for and their deposited amounts were properly appropriated towards customs duty on imported gold under the nominated-agency exemption scheme, resulting in cancellation of the bonds and discharge of duty liability. However, the Tribunal set aside imposition of penalty under s.112(a) of the Act and the orders of confiscation and redemption fine, finding no collusion or responsibility of the appellants for fraudulent diversion by the exporter. Consequently, extended limitation was not invoked against the appellants and no further action survives against them in respect of the appropriated duty.
CESTAT allowed the appeal in part, holding that the appellants remained liable for and their deposited amounts were properly appropriated towards customs duty on imported gold under the nominated-agency exemption scheme, resulting in cancellation of the bonds and discharge of duty liability. However, the Tribunal set aside imposition of penalty under s.112(a) of the Act and the orders of confiscation and redemption fine, finding no collusion or responsibility of the appellants for fraudulent diversion by the exporter. Consequently, extended limitation was not invoked against the appellants and no further action survives against them in respect of the appropriated duty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.