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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10141 to 10160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the appellant validly availed benefit of N/N.46/2011-Cus. dated 01.06.2011 by presenting four distinct country-of-origin certificates at import. The Tribunal found no conclusive evidence to impugn the COOs, rejected demands founded on conjecture and e-mails, and held that COOs not sent for verification could not be invalidated by extrapolation from other verifications. The demand for differential duty of Rs.31,07,086 with interest was annulled, the goods were held not liable for confiscation, the redemption fine of Rs.3,00,000 under s.125 was set aside, and penalties under ss.114A and 114AA were held unsustainable.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the appellant validly availed benefit of N/N.46/2011-Cus. dated 01.06.2011 by presenting four distinct country-of-origin certificates at import. The Tribunal found no conclusive evidence to impugn the COOs, rejected demands founded on conjecture and e-mails, and held that COOs not sent for verification could not be invalidated by extrapolation from other verifications. The demand for differential duty of Rs.31,07,086 with interest was annulled, the goods were held not liable for confiscation, the redemption fine of Rs.3,00,000 under s.125 was set aside, and penalties under ss.114A and 114AA were held unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
