Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Seizure - Burden of proof - ‘reasonable belief’ - Onus for proving the goods to be not smuggled - Seizure outside the ‘customs area’ - The Tribunal noted that the burden of proof does indeed shift to the person from whose possession the goods were seized under section 123, emphasizing the necessity of proving that the goods were not smuggled. The Tribunal confirmed the confiscation under section 111 was justified based on the evidence presented, including the frequency of travel by the Main Accused and the nature of the goods being consistent with smuggling activities. The evidence from electronic devices and a diary supported the assumption of smuggling.
Seizure - Burden of proof - ‘reasonable belief’ - Onus for proving the goods to be not smuggled - Seizure outside the ‘customs area’ - The Tribunal noted that the burden of proof does indeed shift to the person from whose possession the goods were seized under section 123, emphasizing the necessity of proving that the goods were not smuggled. The Tribunal confirmed the confiscation under section 111 was justified based on the evidence presented, including the frequency of travel by the Main Accused and the nature of the goods being consistent with smuggling activities. The evidence from electronic devices and a diary supported the assumption of smuggling.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
