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 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.