Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Invalid pre-shipment inspection certificates (PSICs) alone do not convert an import into an improper import; non-compliance with PSIC/DGFT requirements attracts administrative inspection or sanctions but not confiscation under the improper-import standard absent evidence of prohibited or incriminating cargo. Consequently, confiscation and redemption fine were set aside for lack of prohibited content. Penal liability for abetment also requires proof of mens rea and active facilitation; finding no sufficient evidence that the importer, director or indenting agent abetted issuance or use of fraudulent PSICs, the Tribunal set aside penalties under the penal provision as unsustainable.
Invalid pre-shipment inspection certificates (PSICs) alone do not convert an import into an improper import; non-compliance with PSIC/DGFT requirements attracts administrative inspection or sanctions but not confiscation under the improper-import standard absent evidence of prohibited or incriminating cargo. Consequently, confiscation and redemption fine were set aside for lack of prohibited content. Penal liability for abetment also requires proof of mens rea and active facilitation; finding no sufficient evidence that the importer, director or indenting agent abetted issuance or use of fraudulent PSICs, the Tribunal set aside penalties under the penal provision as unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
