Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The High Court held that the Income Tax authorities have the power to seek interim custody of currency notes seized and produced before the jurisdictional magistrate or reported to the magistrate u/s 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code. When the Income Tax Act empowers the competent authority to requisition assets of assessees and adjust them towards liabilities, if there is reason to believe that the asset represents undisclosed income or property, the competent authority is best suited to hold the seized currency notes until the inquiry or trial concludes. Section 132A allows requisitioning books of account, and the competent authority can seek interim custody of seized assets, even if unable to issue a requisition u/s 132A when the asset is produced before the magistrate. The competent authority can apply for interim custody u/s 451 of the CrPC to prevent Sections 132A and 132B from becoming futile. The direction in an earlier case for returning the amount if proceedings are not completed within six months is unwarranted, as disbursement can be ordered only at the conclusion of the inquiry or trial u/s 452 of the CrPC.
The High Court held that the Income Tax authorities have the power to seek interim custody of currency notes seized and produced before the jurisdictional magistrate or reported to the magistrate u/s 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code. When the Income Tax Act empowers the competent authority to requisition assets of assessees and adjust them towards liabilities, if there is reason to believe that the asset represents undisclosed income or property, the competent authority is best suited to hold the seized currency notes until the inquiry or trial concludes. Section 132A allows requisitioning books of account, and the competent authority can seek interim custody of seized assets, even if unable to issue a requisition u/s 132A when the asset is produced before the magistrate. The competent authority can apply for interim custody u/s 451 of the CrPC to prevent Sections 132A and 132B from becoming futile. The direction in an earlier case for returning the amount if proceedings are not completed within six months is unwarranted, as disbursement can be ordered only at the conclusion of the inquiry or trial u/s 452 of the CrPC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
