Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Customs broker challenging the revocation of license and forfeiture of security deposit by the Customs authorities. The court held that the power to suspend and revoke the license are distinct under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. The 90-day timeline for initiating revocation proceedings applies from the date of the offence report, not the preliminary enquiry for suspension. Although the revocation notice was issued beyond 90 days from the preliminary enquiry, it was within the permissible period from the offence report date. The broker's consistent violations of verifying exporter details under Regulation 10(n) justified the revocation, despite the Tribunal's order being improper. No substantial question of law arose for consideration.
The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Customs broker challenging the revocation of license and forfeiture of security deposit by the Customs authorities. The court held that the power to suspend and revoke the license are distinct under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. The 90-day timeline for initiating revocation proceedings applies from the date of the offence report, not the preliminary enquiry for suspension. Although the revocation notice was issued beyond 90 days from the preliminary enquiry, it was within the permissible period from the offence report date. The broker's consistent violations of verifying exporter details under Regulation 10(n) justified the revocation, despite the Tribunal's order being improper. No substantial question of law arose for consideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.