Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Validity of penalty proceedings turned on whether the limitation period in clause (c) of Section 275(1) is residuary; the court held clause (c) is residuary and clauses (a) or (b) apply where penalty proceedings originate from an assessment or revision. Because the penalty under the special provision arose from an assessment linked to admissions during search and was appealed, the court applied the limitation computation under clause (a), measuring six months from receipt of the appellate tribunal order and finding the penalty issued on the final permissible date. Revision proceedings were quashed, so clause (b) did not apply, and the writ was dismissed.
Validity of penalty proceedings turned on whether the limitation period in clause (c) of Section 275(1) is residuary; the court held clause (c) is residuary and clauses (a) or (b) apply where penalty proceedings originate from an assessment or revision. Because the penalty under the special provision arose from an assessment linked to admissions during search and was appealed, the court applied the limitation computation under clause (a), measuring six months from receipt of the appellate tribunal order and finding the penalty issued on the final permissible date. Revision proceedings were quashed, so clause (b) did not apply, and the writ was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.