Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Seeking grant of anticipatory bail - bailable offence or not - failure to make payment of tax - wilful attempt to evade any tax or payment of any tax - The applicant argued that the primary issue was tax evasion under MVAT, citing ongoing insolvency proceedings against a debtor as the reason for non-payment of taxes. - The High Court acknowledged the serious allegations of tax evasion and misappropriation, noting the substantial amount involved and the importance of custodial interrogation for a thorough investigation. - After analyzing relevant legal provisions and precedent cases, the Court concluded that the defendant could be prosecuted under both MVAT and IPC for the same set of facts. It cited Section 26 of the General Clauses Act to support this interpretation.
Seeking grant of anticipatory bail - bailable offence or not - failure to make payment of tax - wilful attempt to evade any tax or payment of any tax - The applicant argued that the primary issue was tax evasion under MVAT, citing ongoing insolvency proceedings against a debtor as the reason for non-payment of taxes. - The High Court acknowledged the serious allegations of tax evasion and misappropriation, noting the substantial amount involved and the importance of custodial interrogation for a thorough investigation. - After analyzing relevant legal provisions and precedent cases, the Court concluded that the defendant could be prosecuted under both MVAT and IPC for the same set of facts. It cited Section 26 of the General Clauses Act to support this interpretation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
