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...
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the Rs.25,000 penalty imposed under Reg.18 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. The Tribunal held the Commissioner's findings that the Appellant failed to advise its client and failed to notify revenue officers were unsupported by evidence; there is no record demonstrating that the Appellant knew of or participated in the client's alleged undervaluation or evasion of customs duty. Similarly, the finding of breach of Reg.10(d) and Reg.10(e) could not be sustained, as no evidence showed the Appellant supplied incorrect information or omitted due diligence. Accordingly, the penalty was quashed and the appeal allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the Rs.25,000 penalty imposed under Reg.18 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. The Tribunal held the Commissioner's findings that the Appellant failed to advise its client and failed to notify revenue officers were unsupported by evidence; there is no record demonstrating that the Appellant knew of or participated in the client's alleged undervaluation or evasion of customs duty. Similarly, the finding of breach of Reg.10(d) and Reg.10(e) could not be sustained, as no evidence showed the Appellant supplied incorrect information or omitted due diligence. Accordingly, the penalty was quashed and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
