Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to reopen or demand duty on alleged wrongful availment of MEIS benefits while the DGFT scrips remained valid and subsisting. The Court held that such incentives arise under the foreign trade policy and must be dealt with by the licensing authority; Section 28 and Section 28AAA of the Customs Act were wrongly invoked because the case did not involve imported goods or any short levy, short payment, non-levy, or non-payment of duty. A penalty under Section 114AA against the customs broker also failed because a mere misdescription in classification, without wilful intent, does not establish mens rea. The Tribunal's order and the penalty were set aside.
Customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to reopen or demand duty on alleged wrongful availment of MEIS benefits while the DGFT scrips remained valid and subsisting. The Court held that such incentives arise under the foreign trade policy and must be dealt with by the licensing authority; Section 28 and Section 28AAA of the Customs Act were wrongly invoked because the case did not involve imported goods or any short levy, short payment, non-levy, or non-payment of duty. A penalty under Section 114AA against the customs broker also failed because a mere misdescription in classification, without wilful intent, does not establish mens rea. The Tribunal's order and the penalty were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
