Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC ruled in favor of petitioner, ordering release of seized gold jewelry within 7 days. The court determined that Baggage Rules 2016 provision regarding items "carried on the person" was ultra vires to Section 79 of Customs Act 1962, as the Act only authorizes rules for articles in baggage, not worn items. The confiscation order was invalidated due to procedural defects: no show cause notice was issued, inadequate hearing opportunities were provided to the Sri Lankan petitioner, and the seizure was based on contradictory evidence regarding how the jewelry was carried. The court emphasized that jewelry worn by passengers falls outside Baggage Rules 2016 scope unless specifically concealed, requiring Section 101 Customs Act proceedings.
HC ruled in favor of petitioner, ordering release of seized gold jewelry within 7 days. The court determined that Baggage Rules 2016 provision regarding items "carried on the person" was ultra vires to Section 79 of Customs Act 1962, as the Act only authorizes rules for articles in baggage, not worn items. The confiscation order was invalidated due to procedural defects: no show cause notice was issued, inadequate hearing opportunities were provided to the Sri Lankan petitioner, and the seizure was based on contradictory evidence regarding how the jewelry was carried. The court emphasized that jewelry worn by passengers falls outside Baggage Rules 2016 scope unless specifically concealed, requiring Section 101 Customs Act proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
