Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7081 to 7100 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ADG, DRI was held competent to extend the time for issuance of SCN under s.110(2) of the Customs Act because relevant notifications appointed ADG, DRI as Commissioner of Customs with all-India territorial jurisdiction; however, the extension order was quasi-judicial and, being non-speaking and unsupported by substantiated reasons (mere reference to the pandemic without showing necessity or post-extension investigation), it was found unsustainable. Non-mention of DIN did not, by itself, vitiate the extension order, as s.110 contains no express nullifying provision despite CBIC circulars. The customs broker and its director were not proved to be importer/beneficial owner or forgers; penalties under ss.112, 114A and 114AA were set aside and s.117 penalty reduced. Mis-declared goods violating Plant Quarantine norms were held liable to confiscation. - CESTAT
ADG, DRI was held competent to extend the time for issuance of SCN under s.110(2) of the Customs Act because relevant notifications appointed ADG, DRI as Commissioner of Customs with all-India territorial jurisdiction; however, the extension order was quasi-judicial and, being non-speaking and unsupported by substantiated reasons (mere reference to the pandemic without showing necessity or post-extension investigation), it was found unsustainable. Non-mention of DIN did not, by itself, vitiate the extension order, as s.110 contains no express nullifying provision despite CBIC circulars. The customs broker and its director were not proved to be importer/beneficial owner or forgers; penalties under ss.112, 114A and 114AA were set aside and s.117 penalty reduced. Mis-declared goods violating Plant Quarantine norms were held liable to confiscation. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
