Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Classification of goods turned on technical composition and SAFTA eligibility; the tribunal applied precedent to hold that low nickel content (including around 1%) does not itself exclude SAFTA benefit and that the personal technical knowledge attributed to the Customs House Agent (CHA) was insufficient to establish culpability. On that basis the tribunal concluded the record does not support invocation of penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act and set aside the penalty, granting consequential relief.
Classification of goods turned on technical composition and SAFTA eligibility; the tribunal applied precedent to hold that low nickel content (including around 1%) does not itself exclude SAFTA benefit and that the personal technical knowledge attributed to the Customs House Agent (CHA) was insufficient to establish culpability. On that basis the tribunal concluded the record does not support invocation of penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act and set aside the penalty, granting consequential relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.