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 dismissed the customs appeals filed by the appellant challenging reassessment of bills of entry under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal noted repeated non-appearance of the appellant/counsel and held that, in view of Section 129D(1A), no justification existed for granting adjournments beyond the statutory maximum of three, relying on SC precedent deprecating mechanical adjournments. On merits, following the jurisdictional HC ruling in a similar matter, CESTAT held that the appellant had unequivocally accepted the reassessment in writing, leaving no occasion for a further speaking order. The appeals were therefore dismissed both for non-prosecution and on merits.
CESTAT dismissed the customs appeals filed by the appellant challenging reassessment of bills of entry under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal noted repeated non-appearance of the appellant/counsel and held that, in view of Section 129D(1A), no justification existed for granting adjournments beyond the statutory maximum of three, relying on SC precedent deprecating mechanical adjournments. On merits, following the jurisdictional HC ruling in a similar matter, CESTAT held that the appellant had unequivocally accepted the reassessment in writing, leaving no occasion for a further speaking order. The appeals were therefore dismissed both for non-prosecution and on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
