Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
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 4915 
