Proceeds of crime and money laundering: PMLA prosecution requires subsisting predicate offence; discharge of predicate accused precludes further prose...
Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Declared value was rejected where the imported stock-lot goods were found to be about 7% higher in quantity than declared, and that discrepancy, with the importer's acceptance of enhanced value, justified doubt about transaction value; re-determination under Rule 12 and Rule 5 was sustained. The Tribunal held that the import had not yet reached the post-clearance stage, so the matter was one of re-assessment under section 17, not recovery of short-paid duty under section 28, and that the section 28 basis was legally incorrect. It further held that goods merely liable to confiscation are not automatically confiscable, and set aside confiscation, redemption fine, and the consequential section 114A penalty.
Declared value was rejected where the imported stock-lot goods were found to be about 7% higher in quantity than declared, and that discrepancy, with the importer's acceptance of enhanced value, justified doubt about transaction value; re-determination under Rule 12 and Rule 5 was sustained. The Tribunal held that the import had not yet reached the post-clearance stage, so the matter was one of re-assessment under section 17, not recovery of short-paid duty under section 28, and that the section 28 basis was legally incorrect. It further held that goods merely liable to confiscation are not automatically confiscable, and set aside confiscation, redemption fine, and the consequential section 114A penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
