Profiteering in construction services for failure to pass input tax credit resulted in repayment exceeding the commensurate benefit and closure of pro...
Duty liability could not be fastened on the appellant merely as a purchaser of import licences when the licences were issued by the competent authority and were not forged, and there was a recorded finding that the appellant was not party to any fraud by the seller; consequently, the demand against the appellant was unsustainable. Statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act were not admissible/reliable in the absence of compliance with section 138B, which requires examination of the maker as a witness, a reasoned finding on admissibility, and an opportunity of cross-examination; hence the statements could not support the demand. The impugned adjudication order was set aside and the appeal was allowed. - CESTAT
Duty liability could not be fastened on the appellant merely as a purchaser of import licences when the licences were issued by the competent authority and were not forged, and there was a recorded finding that the appellant was not party to any fraud by the seller; consequently, the demand against the appellant was unsustainable. Statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act were not admissible/reliable in the absence of compliance with section 138B, which requires examination of the maker as a witness, a reasoned finding on admissibility, and an opportunity of cross-examination; hence the statements could not support the demand. The impugned adjudication order was set aside and the appeal was allowed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
