Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
CESTAT upheld Revenue's classification of the imported 50 GSM coated paper in rolls under CTSH 4810 13, specifically CTI 4810 13 90, rejecting the appellant's claim for classification under CTI 4810 19 90 or CTI 4810 29 00. Consequently, the benefit of exemption under N/N. 152/2009, as amended by N/N. 66/2016 (S. No. 385), was denied, and the demand for differential customs duty with applicable interest on the wrongly self-assessed Bills of Entry was confirmed. However, CESTAT held that the goods were not liable to confiscation under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962, and accordingly set aside the confiscation and the penalty imposed under Section 112. The appeal was thus partly allowed.
CESTAT upheld Revenue's classification of the imported 50 GSM coated paper in rolls under CTSH 4810 13, specifically CTI 4810 13 90, rejecting the appellant's claim for classification under CTI 4810 19 90 or CTI 4810 29 00. Consequently, the benefit of exemption under N/N. 152/2009, as amended by N/N. 66/2016 (S. No. 385), was denied, and the demand for differential customs duty with applicable interest on the wrongly self-assessed Bills of Entry was confirmed. However, CESTAT held that the goods were not liable to confiscation under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962, and accordingly set aside the confiscation and the penalty imposed under Section 112. The appeal was thus partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
