Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Reliance on inquiry statements without compliance with the cross-examination safeguard under Section 138B, coupled with weak corroboration, was held insufficient to sustain penalty for alleged smuggling facilitation. The Tribunal found that the statements used against the appellants were untested, the Angadiya letters were not proved as reliable records, and the Department failed to connect the alleged acts with passport data, duty rosters, call records, or proper identification. On the standard of preponderance of probability, conscious involvement or facilitation of goods liable to confiscation was not established, so the penalties under Section 112(b) against both appellants were set aside.
Reliance on inquiry statements without compliance with the cross-examination safeguard under Section 138B, coupled with weak corroboration, was held insufficient to sustain penalty for alleged smuggling facilitation. The Tribunal found that the statements used against the appellants were untested, the Angadiya letters were not proved as reliable records, and the Department failed to connect the alleged acts with passport data, duty rosters, call records, or proper identification. On the standard of preponderance of probability, conscious involvement or facilitation of goods liable to confiscation was not established, so the penalties under Section 112(b) against both appellants were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
