Trademark depreciation and section 14A adjustments: ITAT applies consistency, independent book-profit computation, and no disallowance without exempt ...
Rebuttable search presumptions and corroboration standards shaped deletion of unsubstantiated additions, while rental income and limited profit estima...
Statements recorded during inquiry under the Customs Act are admissible for proving their truth only if the deponent is examined as a witness before the adjudicating authority and the authority forms an opinion to admit them, followed by opportunity for cross examination; this mandatory procedure in analogous provisions for customs and central excise neutralises coercion risk. The impugned penalty rested solely on inquiry statements recorded without following that procedure, so such statements could not sustain a penalty for abetment under the customs penalty provision. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the appellants was quashed and the appeals allowed.
Statements recorded during inquiry under the Customs Act are admissible for proving their truth only if the deponent is examined as a witness before the adjudicating authority and the authority forms an opinion to admit them, followed by opportunity for cross examination; this mandatory procedure in analogous provisions for customs and central excise neutralises coercion risk. The impugned penalty rested solely on inquiry statements recorded without following that procedure, so such statements could not sustain a penalty for abetment under the customs penalty provision. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the appellants was quashed and the appeals allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.