Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Diversion of EPCG-imported capital goods to vendors' premises and non-endorsement of supporting manufacturers was held not to breach substantive EPCG conditions where there was no allegation of sale, transfer, or other impermissible disposal and the export obligation was stated to be fulfilled; DGFT's post facto approval for inclusion of supporting manufacturers bound Customs, and the remaining notification conditions were treated as compliance safeguards, so duty demand was unsustainable. Alleged misdeclaration under s.114AA failed as the notice did not establish any intentional false statement or document, so penalty was not imposable. Extended limitation was rejected because clearance under bond kept the obligation live, enabling issuance of notice upon non-production of discharge certificate, but the Revenue's appeal still failed on merits and was dismissed. - CESTAT
Diversion of EPCG-imported capital goods to vendors' premises and non-endorsement of supporting manufacturers was held not to breach substantive EPCG conditions where there was no allegation of sale, transfer, or other impermissible disposal and the export obligation was stated to be fulfilled; DGFT's post facto approval for inclusion of supporting manufacturers bound Customs, and the remaining notification conditions were treated as compliance safeguards, so duty demand was unsustainable. Alleged misdeclaration under s.114AA failed as the notice did not establish any intentional false statement or document, so penalty was not imposable. Extended limitation was rejected because clearance under bond kept the obligation live, enabling issuance of notice upon non-production of discharge certificate, but the Revenue's appeal still failed on merits and was dismissed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
