Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Mechanical approval without recorded reasons and failure to communicate any extension before expiry of the six-month period meant the seized cash could not lawfully be retained under the Customs Act; retention after that period was therefore without jurisdiction and the petitioners were entitled to return of the cash. Transfer of the cash to the income tax authorities during pendency of the writ proceedings, after customs had already lost jurisdiction, was treated as overreaching the court, justifying costs, though the amount was reduced after apology and an assurance of future compliance.
Mechanical approval without recorded reasons and failure to communicate any extension before expiry of the six-month period meant the seized cash could not lawfully be retained under the Customs Act; retention after that period was therefore without jurisdiction and the petitioners were entitled to return of the cash. Transfer of the cash to the income tax authorities during pendency of the writ proceedings, after customs had already lost jurisdiction, was treated as overreaching the court, justifying costs, though the amount was reduced after apology and an assurance of future compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
