Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
CESTAT examined penalties imposed on the appellant, a Customs Broker, under ss. 112(a), 112(b) and proposed enhancement under s. 114A CA for allegedly aiding and abetting clearance of goods using forged DFRC licences. The Tribunal held that the department failed to establish, with cogent evidence, that the appellant had the requisite knowledge or shared common design in the fraudulent use of DFRCs; mere interactions, monetary transactions and document handling were insufficient to prove abetment or conspiracy. Findings based on assumptions and presumptions were held unsustainable. Consequently, the penalty on the appellant was set aside and the Revenue's appeal for enhancement of penalty under s. 114A was dismissed.
CESTAT examined penalties imposed on the appellant, a Customs Broker, under ss. 112(a), 112(b) and proposed enhancement under s. 114A CA for allegedly aiding and abetting clearance of goods using forged DFRC licences. The Tribunal held that the department failed to establish, with cogent evidence, that the appellant had the requisite knowledge or shared common design in the fraudulent use of DFRCs; mere interactions, monetary transactions and document handling were insufficient to prove abetment or conspiracy. Findings based on assumptions and presumptions were held unsustainable. Consequently, the penalty on the appellant was set aside and the Revenue's appeal for enhancement of penalty under s. 114A was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
