Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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.