Tax authority's substitution of projected figures with actuals overturned; original acquisition valuation upheld; transfer pricing issues remitted for...
Beneficial owner held liable for differential customs duty; royalties added under Rule 10(1)(c); confiscation, penalties under s.111(m), s.114A, s.112...
CESTAT allowed the appeal filed by the importer of the aircraft and spare parts, holding that the benefit of the exemption notification was rightly available. It found no violation of Condition 104, as operation of non-scheduled air transport services through charter operations, including for group companies against remuneration, satisfied the requirement of use for non-scheduled operations. Non-issuance of tickets and absence of published tariff did not defeat the exemption. CESTAT further held that invocation of the extended period of limitation under s. 28(4) Customs Act was unsustainable, as there was no specific finding of deliberate suppression or intent to evade duty. Consequently, the demand, interest and penalty were set aside and the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority was quashed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal filed by the importer of the aircraft and spare parts, holding that the benefit of the exemption notification was rightly available. It found no violation of Condition 104, as operation of non-scheduled air transport services through charter operations, including for group companies against remuneration, satisfied the requirement of use for non-scheduled operations. Non-issuance of tickets and absence of published tariff did not defeat the exemption. CESTAT further held that invocation of the extended period of limitation under s. 28(4) Customs Act was unsustainable, as there was no specific finding of deliberate suppression or intent to evade duty. Consequently, the demand, interest and penalty were set aside and the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.