Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Jurisdiction of Preventive officer to initiate any proceeding including proceeding u/s 110(1) - Show Cause Notice for seized goods - The High Court determined that the Preventive Officer did not have the jurisdiction to initiate proceedings at the airport, which falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo Complex), Kolkata. - The seizure did not comply with Section 110(1) of the Customs Act as the Preventive Officer did not record the necessary satisfaction for believing the goods were liable for confiscation. - Consequently, the actions taken by the Preventive Officer were declared non-est (invalid), and the goods were ordered to be returned to the petitioner.
Jurisdiction of Preventive officer to initiate any proceeding including proceeding u/s 110(1) - Show Cause Notice for seized goods - The High Court determined that the Preventive Officer did not have the jurisdiction to initiate proceedings at the airport, which falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo Complex), Kolkata. - The seizure did not comply with Section 110(1) of the Customs Act as the Preventive Officer did not record the necessary satisfaction for believing the goods were liable for confiscation. - Consequently, the actions taken by the Preventive Officer were declared non-est (invalid), and the goods were ordered to be returned to the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.