Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
CESTAT set aside customs penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114AA because the revenue failed to prove the alleged collusion and evasion scheme. The Tribunal followed its earlier orders in the appellant's own case and in identical matters, noting that the alleged fake certificates of origin had not been investigated or established through the Malaysian authorities. It also found that the electronic documents relied upon against the appellant were inadmissible in evidence. As the foundational allegations were not proved, the penalty basis failed and no penal liability survived.
CESTAT set aside customs penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114AA because the revenue failed to prove the alleged collusion and evasion scheme. The Tribunal followed its earlier orders in the appellant's own case and in identical matters, noting that the alleged fake certificates of origin had not been investigated or established through the Malaysian authorities. It also found that the electronic documents relied upon against the appellant were inadmissible in evidence. As the foundational allegations were not proved, the penalty basis failed and no penal liability survived.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
