Permanent Establishment and Business Connection: foreign consultancy receipts not attributable where no fixed base or corporate veil piercing establis...
Limitation period commencement and procedural inquiry rules: identity-based limitation upheld; complaints by authorised public servants need not attra...
A classification dispute in self-assessment does not, by itself, establish wilful misstatement or suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. The Tribunal held that where the importer disclosed the relevant particulars in the Bills of Entry and the dispute was only over tariff classification, the extended limitation period under section 28(4) was not available; reliance on statements recorded under section 108 was impermissible without compliance with section 138B. On the same footing, the penalty under section 114A could not survive. The Tribunal also held that wrong classification alone does not amount to misdeclaration for confiscation under section 111(m), so the confiscation order was set aside.
A classification dispute in self-assessment does not, by itself, establish wilful misstatement or suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. The Tribunal held that where the importer disclosed the relevant particulars in the Bills of Entry and the dispute was only over tariff classification, the extended limitation period under section 28(4) was not available; reliance on statements recorded under section 108 was impermissible without compliance with section 138B. On the same footing, the penalty under section 114A could not survive. The Tribunal also held that wrong classification alone does not amount to misdeclaration for confiscation under section 111(m), so the confiscation order was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
