Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
HC determined that absolute confiscation of undeclared gold carried by travelers without offering redemption option violates customs regulations. While gold import is restricted and regulated, not prohibited, travelers must pay appropriate customs duty whether wearing or carrying gold ornaments. The court set aside the impugned order of absolute confiscation, holding that Section 125 of Customs Act requires authorities to offer redemption option for non-prohibited goods. Matter remitted to Joint Commissioner of Customs to determine appropriate redemption fine. Court emphasized distinction between restricted versus prohibited goods, confirming gold falls under former category requiring regulated import rather than outright prohibition.
HC determined that absolute confiscation of undeclared gold carried by travelers without offering redemption option violates customs regulations. While gold import is restricted and regulated, not prohibited, travelers must pay appropriate customs duty whether wearing or carrying gold ornaments. The court set aside the impugned order of absolute confiscation, holding that Section 125 of Customs Act requires authorities to offer redemption option for non-prohibited goods. Matter remitted to Joint Commissioner of Customs to determine appropriate redemption fine. Court emphasized distinction between restricted versus prohibited goods, confirming gold falls under former category requiring regulated import rather than outright prohibition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.