Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
CESTAT upheld penalty liability where the appellant admitted procuring third-party shipping bills for consideration and using them to falsely show fulfilment of EPCG export obligations. The Tribunal treated the cancelled licences and EODCs as confirming the fraudulent arrangement, and held that these acts rendered the goods liable to confiscation under section 111, attracting penalty under section 112(a). It also held that knowing use of false shipping bills and related documents in customs proceedings squarely attracted section 114AA. On proportionality, however, it considered the surrounding circumstances and reduced each penalty to Rs. 50,000, finding that amount sufficient to meet the ends of justice.
CESTAT upheld penalty liability where the appellant admitted procuring third-party shipping bills for consideration and using them to falsely show fulfilment of EPCG export obligations. The Tribunal treated the cancelled licences and EODCs as confirming the fraudulent arrangement, and held that these acts rendered the goods liable to confiscation under section 111, attracting penalty under section 112(a). It also held that knowing use of false shipping bills and related documents in customs proceedings squarely attracted section 114AA. On proportionality, however, it considered the surrounding circumstances and reduced each penalty to Rs. 50,000, finding that amount sufficient to meet the ends of justice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
