Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
Straight-line lease rental accounting change results in penalty quashed where disclosed accounts and bona fide arguable accounting interpretation exis...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7221 to 7240 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Statements recorded under Section 108 were admissible, but undervaluation of export goods could not be proved without reliable independent corroboration. The Department relied on statements, e-mails and a purported overseas contract, yet the exporters were not party to that contract, were denied cross-examination of key persons, and received payment at the declared FOB value through banking channels. Electronic printouts and e-mails were also rejected for non-compliance with Section 138C and for lack of proof of source and authenticity. The Tribunal therefore held that receipt of any additional consideration was not established and set aside the differential duty demand and penalties.
Statements recorded under Section 108 were admissible, but undervaluation of export goods could not be proved without reliable independent corroboration. The Department relied on statements, e-mails and a purported overseas contract, yet the exporters were not party to that contract, were denied cross-examination of key persons, and received payment at the declared FOB value through banking channels. Electronic printouts and e-mails were also rejected for non-compliance with Section 138C and for lack of proof of source and authenticity. The Tribunal therefore held that receipt of any additional consideration was not established and set aside the differential duty demand and penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.