Revenue authority mandates using scheme-specific reversal procedures, not revising original entries, for instrument-based trade/customs benefits effec...
Transaction value under s.15(1) governs unrelated sales; valuation between related parties per Rule 28; consignment note required for unregistered rec...
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the anonymized importer and set aside the Commissioner's order dated 13.04.2007. It held that, since the REP licences in question were duly issued by the competent licensing authority and were not forged licences, customs duty liability could not be fastened on the appellant as a bona fide transferee, even if the original licences had been procured on the basis of fraudulent export or bank documents. CESTAT further held that the inculpatory statements recorded under s.108 of the Customs Act were inadmissible, as the mandatory procedure under s.138B, including examination of the maker as a witness and affording an opportunity for cross-examination, had not been followed. Consequently, the demand of duty, confiscation, and penalties were unsustainable.
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the anonymized importer and set aside the Commissioner's order dated 13.04.2007. It held that, since the REP licences in question were duly issued by the competent licensing authority and were not forged licences, customs duty liability could not be fastened on the appellant as a bona fide transferee, even if the original licences had been procured on the basis of fraudulent export or bank documents. CESTAT further held that the inculpatory statements recorded under s.108 of the Customs Act were inadmissible, as the mandatory procedure under s.138B, including examination of the maker as a witness and affording an opportunity for cross-examination, had not been followed. Consequently, the demand of duty, confiscation, and penalties were unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
