Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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 4827 
Join Channel 
