Provisional attachment of laundered funds and equivalent-value property sustained, with statutory protection limited to pension, gratuity and providen...
Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
Breach of the secure transit obligation under cargo handling regulations, by itself, did not establish abetment of attempted export of prohibited goods. The essential basis for penalty under Section 114 was knowledge that the goods were liable to confiscation, or admissible evidence of active participation or positive collusion, and that evidentiary burden was not met. A mere omission in secure transport, without proof of such knowledge or abetment, was insufficient. The penalty was therefore unsustainable and was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Breach of the secure transit obligation under cargo handling regulations, by itself, did not establish abetment of attempted export of prohibited goods. The essential basis for penalty under Section 114 was knowledge that the goods were liable to confiscation, or admissible evidence of active participation or positive collusion, and that evidentiary burden was not met. A mere omission in secure transport, without proof of such knowledge or abetment, was insufficient. The penalty was therefore unsustainable and was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
