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...
Seized cash cannot be automatically released after 120 days u/s 132B's second proviso. This proviso applies only after the Assessing Officer determines the existing liability and approves asset return. Without such determination, the second proviso does not apply. The first proviso lacks a timeline, while the second proviso requires the AO's assessment. Despite disclosures and applications, the AO did not decide on liability or asset return here. The High Court correctly held that Section 132B's second proviso does not mandate automatic release after 120 days. However, since cash was seized from petitioners' lockers after prior disclosure, authorities must decide on their application with a reasoned order within four weeks, potentially refunding with interest if the source is satisfactorily explained u/s 132B(4)(a)&(b).
Seized cash cannot be automatically released after 120 days u/s 132B's second proviso. This proviso applies only after the Assessing Officer determines the existing liability and approves asset return. Without such determination, the second proviso does not apply. The first proviso lacks a timeline, while the second proviso requires the AO's assessment. Despite disclosures and applications, the AO did not decide on liability or asset return here. The High Court correctly held that Section 132B's second proviso does not mandate automatic release after 120 days. However, since cash was seized from petitioners' lockers after prior disclosure, authorities must decide on their application with a reasoned order within four weeks, potentially refunding with interest if the source is satisfactorily explained u/s 132B(4)(a)&(b).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
