https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405810 The Madras HC held that no substantial question of law arose where the Tribunal had re-appreciated the evidence and addressed the core factual matrix, including the alleged modus operandi, co-noticees' statements and call detail records. It found that the lower authorities had examined the plea of coercion, the alleged retraction and the objection that the call records were beyond the show cause notice, and that the statements remained unretracted in the legal sense. Supported by corroborative material, the Tribunal's order was neither perfunctory nor non-speaking, so appellate interference was not warranted and the penalty finding was sustained. en-us Thu, 18 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jul 2021 15:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405810 The Madras HC held that no substantial question of law arose where the Tribunal had re-appreciated the evidence and addressed the core factual matrix, including the alleged modus operandi, co-noticees' statements and call detail records. It found that the lower authorities had examined the plea of coercion, the alleged retraction and the objection that the call records were beyond the show cause notice, and that the statements remained unretracted in the legal sense. Supported by corroborative material, the Tribunal's order was neither perfunctory nor non-speaking, so appellate interference was not warranted and the penalty finding was sustained. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 18 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405810