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 allowed the appeals filed by the noticee-appellants and set aside the impugned order in entirety. The T. noted that the same order of the Commissioner, including the enhancement of assessable value by adding alleged differential freight for part-voyage loading, and the resultant duty demands and penalties under Ss. 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act, had already been quashed in earlier connected appeals of the main importers. As there is no stay or reversal of that decision by the SC or any HC, judicial discipline required following it. Since confiscation of the goods had already been annulled, no penalty under S. 112(a) or S. 114AA could survive against the present appellants. All penalties were therefore vacated and the appeals were allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeals filed by the noticee-appellants and set aside the impugned order in entirety. The T. noted that the same order of the Commissioner, including the enhancement of assessable value by adding alleged differential freight for part-voyage loading, and the resultant duty demands and penalties under Ss. 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act, had already been quashed in earlier connected appeals of the main importers. As there is no stay or reversal of that decision by the SC or any HC, judicial discipline required following it. Since confiscation of the goods had already been annulled, no penalty under S. 112(a) or S. 114AA could survive against the present appellants. All penalties were therefore vacated and the appeals were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
