Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
Misclassification between copra and dry coconut: customs recovery and re-valuation quashed for lack of prior licensing-authority invalidation, appeals...
Procedural challenge based on delay, Rule 4 non-compliance and denial of cross-examination failed because the Tribunal found a prior investigation, notice through summons, supply of relied-upon documents, replies, hearing and recorded satisfaction to proceed, with no prejudice shown. An authorised person under FEMA was held amenable to penalty because the statutory definition of "person" is broad and Chapter III does not grant immunity from Section 13 action. The company's issuance of forex prepaid cards without verifying actual travellers, passports or KYC particulars, and acceptance of funds from third parties, supported the findings of contraventions. Personal liability of the company officer was rejected because he was not in charge during the relevant period and could not be treated as a de facto declarant.
Procedural challenge based on delay, Rule 4 non-compliance and denial of cross-examination failed because the Tribunal found a prior investigation, notice through summons, supply of relied-upon documents, replies, hearing and recorded satisfaction to proceed, with no prejudice shown. An authorised person under FEMA was held amenable to penalty because the statutory definition of "person" is broad and Chapter III does not grant immunity from Section 13 action. The company's issuance of forex prepaid cards without verifying actual travellers, passports or KYC particulars, and acceptance of funds from third parties, supported the findings of contraventions. Personal liability of the company officer was rejected because he was not in charge during the relevant period and could not be treated as a de facto declarant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
