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 invalidated confiscation orders regarding seized gold ornaments worn by petitioners at arrival. Court found multiple procedural violations: no show cause notice issued, denial of proper hearing, and falsification of Mahazar (seizure document) by customs officials. Officials falsely claimed jewelry was concealed under sleeves when petitioners were wearing it openly. Significantly, HC ruled that Baggage Rules 2016 provision regarding items "carried on the person" was ultra vires the Customs Act 1962. The rule-making authority exceeded statutory scope by regulating worn jewelry. Court directed release of seized items within 7 days, finding officials orchestrated false case potentially to benefit unknown parties. Ruling establishes that jewelry worn by passengers falls outside Baggage Rules 2016 purview unless deliberately concealed under Section 101 of Customs Act.
HC invalidated confiscation orders regarding seized gold ornaments worn by petitioners at arrival. Court found multiple procedural violations: no show cause notice issued, denial of proper hearing, and falsification of Mahazar (seizure document) by customs officials. Officials falsely claimed jewelry was concealed under sleeves when petitioners were wearing it openly. Significantly, HC ruled that Baggage Rules 2016 provision regarding items "carried on the person" was ultra vires the Customs Act 1962. The rule-making authority exceeded statutory scope by regulating worn jewelry. Court directed release of seized items within 7 days, finding officials orchestrated false case potentially to benefit unknown parties. Ruling establishes that jewelry worn by passengers falls outside Baggage Rules 2016 purview unless deliberately concealed under Section 101 of Customs Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.