Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Penalty under section 112(b) was unsustainable because the essential element of knowledge that the goods were liable to confiscation was not proved. The appellant had purchased the branded watches locally from the importer, was not involved in the import declaration process, and stated that the price revision followed the importer's price list. In the absence of documentary evidence showing awareness of the retail sale price declared at import or the duty position, the Tribunal held that mens rea could not be presumed. The penalty was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Penalty under section 112(b) was unsustainable because the essential element of knowledge that the goods were liable to confiscation was not proved. The appellant had purchased the branded watches locally from the importer, was not involved in the import declaration process, and stated that the price revision followed the importer's price list. In the absence of documentary evidence showing awareness of the retail sale price declared at import or the duty position, the Tribunal held that mens rea could not be presumed. The penalty was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
