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...
Appellate jurisdiction is not excluded merely because an article...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary stage.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Appellate jurisdiction is not excluded merely because an article is recovered from an international passenger at an airport. The exclusion for goods imported or exported as baggage applies only where the challenged order clearly and unambiguously concerns goods having that character. A gold kada worn on a passenger's wrist could not, at the preliminary stage, conclusively be treated as baggage; whether it was a personal ornament, bona fide personal effect, declarable article, or concealed goods required merits examination. Departmental characterisation cannot determine jurisdiction, and authorities involving goods recovered from luggage or admitted baggage are distinguishable. The appeal was therefore maintainable and listed for disposal on merits.
Appellate jurisdiction is not excluded merely because an article is recovered from an international passenger at an airport. The exclusion for goods imported or exported as baggage applies only where the challenged order clearly and unambiguously concerns goods having that character. A gold kada worn on a passenger's wrist could not, at the preliminary stage, conclusively be treated as baggage; whether it was a personal ornament, bona fide personal effect, declarable article, or concealed goods required merits examination. Departmental characterisation cannot determine jurisdiction, and authorities involving goods recovered from luggage or admitted baggage are distinguishable. The appeal was therefore maintainable and listed for disposal on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
