Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
CESTAT held that the Revenue failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the intercepted Indian currency was intended for illegal export, noting the interception occurred about 3 km from the Bangladesh border and that the benefit of doubt accrues to the appellant. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of absolute confiscation and the imposition of penalty under s.114 of the Customs Act, 1962, and directed the release of Rs.1,500,000 deposited with a bank, which had been seized from an intercepted person but purportedly belonging to the appellant. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order quashed.
CESTAT held that the Revenue failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the intercepted Indian currency was intended for illegal export, noting the interception occurred about 3 km from the Bangladesh border and that the benefit of doubt accrues to the appellant. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of absolute confiscation and the imposition of penalty under s.114 of the Customs Act, 1962, and directed the release of Rs.1,500,000 deposited with a bank, which had been seized from an intercepted person but purportedly belonging to the appellant. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
