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 held that failure to serve Show Cause Notice within six months under Section 124(a) read with Section 110 of Customs Act 1962 entitled the respondent to return of seized goods. While subsequent confiscation order was valid, it operated independently of the original seizure dispute. The court ruled that immediate possession must be restored to respondent despite confiscation order, maintaining status quo ante until enforcement. The interpretation of "given" in the statute requires actual service, not mere issuance of notice. Authorities were directed to return seized gold within four weeks, though confiscation rights remained preserved for separate enforcement.
HC held that failure to serve Show Cause Notice within six months under Section 124(a) read with Section 110 of Customs Act 1962 entitled the respondent to return of seized goods. While subsequent confiscation order was valid, it operated independently of the original seizure dispute. The court ruled that immediate possession must be restored to respondent despite confiscation order, maintaining status quo ante until enforcement. The interpretation of "given" in the statute requires actual service, not mere issuance of notice. Authorities were directed to return seized gold within four weeks, though confiscation rights remained preserved for separate enforcement.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.