Misdeclaration of quantity rejected where supplier evidence established counting errors, so reassessment, confiscation and redemption fine were set as...
Admissibility of electronic evidence controls valuation and penalty exposure; non compliant e records and statements nullify revaluation and penalties...
Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to discharge the burden to show seized currency and goods were proceeds of clandestine removals; appellants produced documentary evidence and affidavits which were not specifically rebutted, so confiscations were set aside. The Tribunal rejected reliance on a theoretical input output formula and selective statements without corroboration, finding the formula inadequate absent independent proof (QTR, buyers, transport, receipt of consideration) and quashed duty demands. Penalties were vacated for lack of proof of willful suppression where records and statutory registers were produced. All impugned seizures, demands and penalties were set aside.
Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to discharge the burden to show seized currency and goods were proceeds of clandestine removals; appellants produced documentary evidence and affidavits which were not specifically rebutted, so confiscations were set aside. The Tribunal rejected reliance on a theoretical input output formula and selective statements without corroboration, finding the formula inadequate absent independent proof (QTR, buyers, transport, receipt of consideration) and quashed duty demands. Penalties were vacated for lack of proof of willful suppression where records and statutory registers were produced. All impugned seizures, demands and penalties were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
