Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
CESTAT upheld the adjudicating authority's order dropping charges against the customs broker for alleged violation of Regulation 10(e) of CBLR, 2018. The Tribunal noted that the broker filed the Bill of Entry based on invoice, packing list and related documents duly received from and authorized by the actual importer, with all core particulars (invoice number, Bill of Lading number, quantity) tallying. The discrepancy in e-mail and phone number in the IGM was treated as secondary information, not indicative of lack of due diligence or mala fides. Finding no breach of Regulation 10(e), CESTAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
CESTAT upheld the adjudicating authority's order dropping charges against the customs broker for alleged violation of Regulation 10(e) of CBLR, 2018. The Tribunal noted that the broker filed the Bill of Entry based on invoice, packing list and related documents duly received from and authorized by the actual importer, with all core particulars (invoice number, Bill of Lading number, quantity) tallying. The discrepancy in e-mail and phone number in the IGM was treated as secondary information, not indicative of lack of due diligence or mala fides. Finding no breach of Regulation 10(e), CESTAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
