Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the Appellant's import of ENABLE 2005-CE under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus was valid. The Tribunal found the item was recognized as an input in the MEPZ LUT renewal of 26 Feb 2013 and thus fell within the SION coverage for the exported product; any non-conformity was procedural. No post-importation conditions of the notification were alleged to be breached. Consequently, confiscation under s.111(o) and penalty under s.112(a)(ii) could not be sustained. Allegations of mis-declaration were unsupported and s.111(m) was not invoked; appeal allowed, order set aside.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the Appellant's import of ENABLE 2005-CE under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus was valid. The Tribunal found the item was recognized as an input in the MEPZ LUT renewal of 26 Feb 2013 and thus fell within the SION coverage for the exported product; any non-conformity was procedural. No post-importation conditions of the notification were alleged to be breached. Consequently, confiscation under s.111(o) and penalty under s.112(a)(ii) could not be sustained. Allegations of mis-declaration were unsupported and s.111(m) was not invoked; appeal allowed, order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
