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 impugned order of the Commissioner of Customs. The Tribunal found no reliable independent evidence that the appellant-exporter overvalued exported goods or filed false declarations so as to attract confiscation under ss. 113(d),(i),(ia) of the Customs Act. Consequently, recovery of drawback, imposition of redemption fine under s.125(1) and penalty under s.114 were held unsustainable. The Tribunal further held s.114AA inapplicable because actual goods, not paper/dummy exports, were shipped, negating the aggravated fraud element required for enhanced penalty. Drawback rejection and consequential penalties were quashed; appeal allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the Commissioner of Customs. The Tribunal found no reliable independent evidence that the appellant-exporter overvalued exported goods or filed false declarations so as to attract confiscation under ss. 113(d),(i),(ia) of the Customs Act. Consequently, recovery of drawback, imposition of redemption fine under s.125(1) and penalty under s.114 were held unsustainable. The Tribunal further held s.114AA inapplicable because actual goods, not paper/dummy exports, were shipped, negating the aggravated fraud element required for enhanced penalty. Drawback rejection and consequential penalties were quashed; appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
