Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
CESTAT held that the Appellant was liable to pay customs duty with interest on 230.77 MT of imported crude palm oil and on the balance found short, as the statutory condition for exemption notification was not fulfilled because the goods were not proved to have been used in manufacture of specified final products. The Tribunal found absence of evidence for clandestine removal and insufficient proof of an accounting error; loss by fire did not negate liability for duty and interest. However, penalties under ss.114A, 114AA and 117 of the Customs Act were set aside for lack of evidence of collusion, misdeclaration or other culpable contravention. Appeal partly allowed.
CESTAT held that the Appellant was liable to pay customs duty with interest on 230.77 MT of imported crude palm oil and on the balance found short, as the statutory condition for exemption notification was not fulfilled because the goods were not proved to have been used in manufacture of specified final products. The Tribunal found absence of evidence for clandestine removal and insufficient proof of an accounting error; loss by fire did not negate liability for duty and interest. However, penalties under ss.114A, 114AA and 117 of the Customs Act were set aside for lack of evidence of collusion, misdeclaration or other culpable contravention. Appeal partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
