Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Non-compliance with the remand order of the Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation - import of rough marble blocks - The Tribunal noted the appellant's submission regarding the communication of license applications to the authorities. It criticized the adjudicating authority for disregarding the altered factual situation highlighted in the remand order and for insisting on restoring the previously discarded order. The Tribunal deemed this defiance of appellate directions as invalidating the impugned order. - The Tribunal emphasized the authority of the DGFT in administering trade policy and issuing import licenses. It clarified that the date of issue of the license was not material to quantitative restrictions, and the relevance lay in its coverage of the impugned goods. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Non-compliance with the remand order of the Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation - import of rough marble blocks - The Tribunal noted the appellant's submission regarding the communication of license applications to the authorities. It criticized the adjudicating authority for disregarding the altered factual situation highlighted in the remand order and for insisting on restoring the previously discarded order. The Tribunal deemed this defiance of appellate directions as invalidating the impugned order. - The Tribunal emphasized the authority of the DGFT in administering trade policy and issuing import licenses. It clarified that the date of issue of the license was not material to quantitative restrictions, and the relevance lay in its coverage of the impugned goods. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
