Charity-run tree plantation and maintenance for environmental preservation qualifies as "charitable activity", making supplies GST-exempt under Notifi...
Drawings/designs supply and erection supervision fees from German contractor: designs non-taxable; supervision taxed as FTS/PE depending on six-month ...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7621 to 7640 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The dominant issue was whether mobile phones seized for invoice mismatch and regulatory non-compliance were liable to confiscation and penalties under the Customs Act. The adjudicating authority correctly treated 3,998 phones as smuggled since the invoices relied on by the importer did not match the documents filed with the Bill of Entry, warranting confiscation; 2,886 phones were properly allowed redemption on fine, and 1,012 phones were rightly subjected to absolute confiscation because import without valid IMEI numbers is prohibited. Separately, absence of MRP/RSP stickers breached FTP requirements and section 4A compliance, justifying confiscation of the 2,886 phones. Penalties imposed on the importing entity and its responsible persons were upheld as proportionate, and the appeals were dismissed. - CESTAT
The dominant issue was whether mobile phones seized for invoice mismatch and regulatory non-compliance were liable to confiscation and penalties under the Customs Act. The adjudicating authority correctly treated 3,998 phones as smuggled since the invoices relied on by the importer did not match the documents filed with the Bill of Entry, warranting confiscation; 2,886 phones were properly allowed redemption on fine, and 1,012 phones were rightly subjected to absolute confiscation because import without valid IMEI numbers is prohibited. Separately, absence of MRP/RSP stickers breached FTP requirements and section 4A compliance, justifying confiscation of the 2,886 phones. Penalties imposed on the importing entity and its responsible persons were upheld as proportionate, and the appeals were dismissed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.