Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the anonymized importer in full and set aside the impugned order-in-original. It held that N/N. 29/2010-Cus is an unconditional exemption from special additional duty, applicable solely on the basis of goods description, and the Dept. cannot read into it conditions not expressly stipulated, including alleged violations of the Legal Metrology Act. CESTAT held that the proper officer, while reassessing differential duty, is bound to extend available exemptions. Consequently, the demand of SAD, along with interest, penalty, confiscation, and redemption fine, was quashed. CESTAT further held that the extended period under the proviso to s.28 of the Customs Act was not invocable, as there was no deliberate misdeclaration or positive act to evade duty by the appellant.
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the anonymized importer in full and set aside the impugned order-in-original. It held that N/N. 29/2010-Cus is an unconditional exemption from special additional duty, applicable solely on the basis of goods description, and the Dept. cannot read into it conditions not expressly stipulated, including alleged violations of the Legal Metrology Act. CESTAT held that the proper officer, while reassessing differential duty, is bound to extend available exemptions. Consequently, the demand of SAD, along with interest, penalty, confiscation, and redemption fine, was quashed. CESTAT further held that the extended period under the proviso to s.28 of the Customs Act was not invocable, as there was no deliberate misdeclaration or positive act to evade duty by the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
