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...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
81 to 100 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT upheld the validity of the SCN issued under s.28(4) r/w s.124 of the Customs Act, holding that gross misdeclaration of description, quantity and value of contraband goods, supported by overseas customs reports, call data records and handwriting expert opinion, established collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression. The plea of lack of corroborative evidence and violation of natural justice due to denial of cross-examination was rejected, as statements under s.108 were voluntary and independent evidence was ample; no prejudice was shown. Departmental officers were found complicit in facilitating fraudulent clearances and were held amenable to penalty as "any person", with protection under s.155 denied. Penalties under ss.112 and 114AA on importers and officers were sustained, and the appeals were disposed of accordingly.
CESTAT upheld the validity of the SCN issued under s.28(4) r/w s.124 of the Customs Act, holding that gross misdeclaration of description, quantity and value of contraband goods, supported by overseas customs reports, call data records and handwriting expert opinion, established collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression. The plea of lack of corroborative evidence and violation of natural justice due to denial of cross-examination was rejected, as statements under s.108 were voluntary and independent evidence was ample; no prejudice was shown. Departmental officers were found complicit in facilitating fraudulent clearances and were held amenable to penalty as "any person", with protection under s.155 denied. Penalties under ss.112 and 114AA on importers and officers were sustained, and the appeals were disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
