Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Gold, a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act, was recovered from an appellant's personal possession and from concealment in a car; the claim of licit acquisition required the claimants to discharge the statutory reverse burden. As the appellants failed to prove lawful import/possession and relied on belated documents and retraction of statements, the gold was held to be smuggled and liable to confiscation under Section 111, resulting in upholding of absolute confiscation. Their knowing involvement in handling, transportation, and possession justified penalties under Section 112(b); the penalties were held reasonable and not liable to interference. Appeal dismissed - CESTAT
Gold, a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act, was recovered from an appellant's personal possession and from concealment in a car; the claim of licit acquisition required the claimants to discharge the statutory reverse burden. As the appellants failed to prove lawful import/possession and relied on belated documents and retraction of statements, the gold was held to be smuggled and liable to confiscation under Section 111, resulting in upholding of absolute confiscation. Their knowing involvement in handling, transportation, and possession justified penalties under Section 112(b); the penalties were held reasonable and not liable to interference. Appeal dismissed - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.