Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
A bona fide transferee of a duty-free licence re-registered in the customs system was held not liable for customs duty merely because the licence was later alleged to have been fraudulently re-registered. The Tribunal distinguished an existing licence that had been re-registered from a fake or forged licence, and applied the principle that a purchaser for value cannot be denied benefit where the licence was validly in circulation and acted upon during its validity. It also held that the extended period was unavailable because the notice relied only on an alleged failure to verify the licence, without any misrepresentation, collusion, or suppression by the purchaser. The demand and impugned order were set aside.
A bona fide transferee of a duty-free licence re-registered in the customs system was held not liable for customs duty merely because the licence was later alleged to have been fraudulently re-registered. The Tribunal distinguished an existing licence that had been re-registered from a fake or forged licence, and applied the principle that a purchaser for value cannot be denied benefit where the licence was validly in circulation and acted upon during its validity. It also held that the extended period was unavailable because the notice relied only on an alleged failure to verify the licence, without any misrepresentation, collusion, or suppression by the purchaser. The demand and impugned order were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.