Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Assessee's project-completion revenue recognition upheld; income addition deleted under Guidance Note/AS-9 and percentage-completion rules as complian...
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the penalties imposed under s.112(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the CHA. The Tribunal held that a licensed Customs House Agent acts on importer-supplied documents and verification pursuant to the Bill of Entry, and liability for illicit importation cannot be imputed absent proof of knowledge or active participation in mis-declaration. No evidence demonstrated the CHA's awareness of pack marking or involvement in the offending importation, nor was the CHA's statement recorded in confiscation proceedings; by contrast, prior authority upholding penalty turned on an admitted voluntary statement of mis-declaration. Consequentially, penalties as to the CHA were annulled and the appeal allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the penalties imposed under s.112(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the CHA. The Tribunal held that a licensed Customs House Agent acts on importer-supplied documents and verification pursuant to the Bill of Entry, and liability for illicit importation cannot be imputed absent proof of knowledge or active participation in mis-declaration. No evidence demonstrated the CHA's awareness of pack marking or involvement in the offending importation, nor was the CHA's statement recorded in confiscation proceedings; by contrast, prior authority upholding penalty turned on an admitted voluntary statement of mis-declaration. Consequentially, penalties as to the CHA were annulled and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
