Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
HC held that seizure under Customs Act s.110(1) requires proper officer to record specific written reasons demonstrating belief that goods are liable for confiscation. Mere citation of statutory provisions without explaining their applicability is insufficient. While the seizure memo was quashed for lacking detailed grounds, the show cause notice was sustained. The court emphasized that goods must be returned if notice under s.124(a) is not issued within 6 months of seizure, subject to valid extensions. Though provisional release occurred after 6 months with two 3-month extensions, investigation can proceed under Customs Act despite invalidation of seizure. The ruling balances procedural safeguards with enforcement powers.
HC held that seizure under Customs Act s.110(1) requires proper officer to record specific written reasons demonstrating belief that goods are liable for confiscation. Mere citation of statutory provisions without explaining their applicability is insufficient. While the seizure memo was quashed for lacking detailed grounds, the show cause notice was sustained. The court emphasized that goods must be returned if notice under s.124(a) is not issued within 6 months of seizure, subject to valid extensions. Though provisional release occurred after 6 months with two 3-month extensions, investigation can proceed under Customs Act despite invalidation of seizure. The ruling balances procedural safeguards with enforcement powers.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.