Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
A High Court held that confiscation proceedings under Section 130 read with Section 122 of the Act, 2017 cannot be initiated merely for an alleged violation of Section 35 without prior determination of tax liability under Sections 73 or 74. Because the show cause notice was issued without satisfying that jurisdictional requirement, it was held to be without jurisdiction. Interference at the notice stage was therefore justified, and the show cause notice and consequential confiscation order were quashed, with liberty to the department to proceed afresh in accordance with law.
A High Court held that confiscation proceedings under Section 130 read with Section 122 of the Act, 2017 cannot be initiated merely for an alleged violation of Section 35 without prior determination of tax liability under Sections 73 or 74. Because the show cause notice was issued without satisfying that jurisdictional requirement, it was held to be without jurisdiction. Interference at the notice stage was therefore justified, and the show cause notice and consequential confiscation order were quashed, with liberty to the department to proceed afresh in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
