Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
The High Court addressed the issue of seizure of goods u/s 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 by Customs Authorities outside their designated area. The jurisdiction of concerned Officers to seize "gold bullions" was questioned as the Customs House did not fall within the jurisdictional area of the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) West Bengal. The Court noted the absence of an application for release or provisional release u/s 110A. The ownership of the goods was in dispute, and the petitioner failed to establish ownership. The seizure order by Customs Officers was found to be without jurisdictional error, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
The High Court addressed the issue of seizure of goods u/s 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 by Customs Authorities outside their designated area. The jurisdiction of concerned Officers to seize "gold bullions" was questioned as the Customs House did not fall within the jurisdictional area of the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) West Bengal. The Court noted the absence of an application for release or provisional release u/s 110A. The ownership of the goods was in dispute, and the petitioner failed to establish ownership. The seizure order by Customs Officers was found to be without jurisdictional error, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.