Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Penalty for estimation of income and disallowances for tax non-deduction clarified: estimation-based penalties not sustainable; additions without conc...
In a CESTAT appeal concerning alleged misdeclaration of imported oil, the tribunal held that inconclusive CRCL chemical reports indicating only some characteristics of base oil, and reliance on a single parameter (viscosity index) while omitting other essential parameters, were insufficient to sustain reclassification, revaluation or penalties; tentative wording ('may be') cannot replace categorical evidence. The adjudicating authority's refusal to examine or permit cross examination of the chemical examiner breached natural justice, so the benefit of doubt was accorded to the importers and the impugned adjudication was set aside.
In a CESTAT appeal concerning alleged misdeclaration of imported oil, the tribunal held that inconclusive CRCL chemical reports indicating only some characteristics of base oil, and reliance on a single parameter (viscosity index) while omitting other essential parameters, were insufficient to sustain reclassification, revaluation or penalties; tentative wording ('may be') cannot replace categorical evidence. The adjudicating authority's refusal to examine or permit cross examination of the chemical examiner breached natural justice, so the benefit of doubt was accorded to the importers and the impugned adjudication was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
