Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Penalty under Section 112(a) was held unsustainable against a Customs House Agent who only assisted in filing the Bill of Entry on a self-declared basis. The Tribunal found no corroborative evidence that the CHA had prior knowledge of the concealment of the smuggled goods, and noted that the penalty against the alleged mastermind had already been set aside. It also considered that no proceedings had been initiated against the CHA under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations. In the absence of proof of knowledge of concealment and licensing-regulation action, the penalty was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Penalty under Section 112(a) was held unsustainable against a Customs House Agent who only assisted in filing the Bill of Entry on a self-declared basis. The Tribunal found no corroborative evidence that the CHA had prior knowledge of the concealment of the smuggled goods, and noted that the penalty against the alleged mastermind had already been set aside. It also considered that no proceedings had been initiated against the CHA under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations. In the absence of proof of knowledge of concealment and licensing-regulation action, the penalty was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.