Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Appellate recourse remained available where a superior officer had assumed functions ordinarily exercised by the proper officer, because such assumption did not extinguish the normal appeal mechanism. The Tribunal further held that the imported goods were not shown to fall within the Steel and Steel Products (Quality Control) Order, 2020 entries requiring BIS certification, so confiscation under section 111(d) for breach of import prohibition could not stand. Misdescription was also not established, as the goods remained classifiable under the same tariff item and the record did not prove intent to evade duty. The declared transaction value could not be rejected without a lawful rule 12 basis and sequential valuation under the valuation rules, so enhancement was unsustainable.
Appellate recourse remained available where a superior officer had assumed functions ordinarily exercised by the proper officer, because such assumption did not extinguish the normal appeal mechanism. The Tribunal further held that the imported goods were not shown to fall within the Steel and Steel Products (Quality Control) Order, 2020 entries requiring BIS certification, so confiscation under section 111(d) for breach of import prohibition could not stand. Misdescription was also not established, as the goods remained classifiable under the same tariff item and the record did not prove intent to evade duty. The declared transaction value could not be rejected without a lawful rule 12 basis and sequential valuation under the valuation rules, so enhancement was unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.