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...
Cross-objections were held maintainable under Section 129A(4) of the Customs Act despite withdrawal of the departmental appeal, because they operate as an independent proceeding once filed. On merits, the imported vehicle was declared used but found brand new, and non-compliance with import policy and motor vehicle requirements justified confiscation under Section 111(d). However, the goods were treated as regulatory-breach goods rather than absolutely prohibited goods, so absolute confiscation was found excessive. The Tribunal therefore allowed redemption on payment of fine, applicable duty and interest, while leaving the reduced penalty undisturbed.
Cross-objections were held maintainable under Section 129A(4) of the Customs Act despite withdrawal of the departmental appeal, because they operate as an independent proceeding once filed. On merits, the imported vehicle was declared used but found brand new, and non-compliance with import policy and motor vehicle requirements justified confiscation under Section 111(d). However, the goods were treated as regulatory-breach goods rather than absolutely prohibited goods, so absolute confiscation was found excessive. The Tribunal therefore allowed redemption on payment of fine, applicable duty and interest, while leaving the reduced penalty undisturbed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
