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 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 4828 
Join Channel 
