Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
HC held that respondents must release seized jewellery immediately, as retention lacks legal authority. The seizure was deemed unauthorized since no outstanding tax liability existed for the relevant assessment year. The court found respondents' contention to retain jewellery for recovering tax dues from subsequent years untenable, particularly given statutory amendments to Section 132B effective 01.04.2022. Consequently, the HC directed unconditional release of the jewellery to the petitioner, emphasizing the respondents acted without jurisdiction in prolonged retention beyond the specified assessment period.
HC held that respondents must release seized jewellery immediately, as retention lacks legal authority. The seizure was deemed unauthorized since no outstanding tax liability existed for the relevant assessment year. The court found respondents' contention to retain jewellery for recovering tax dues from subsequent years untenable, particularly given statutory amendments to Section 132B effective 01.04.2022. Consequently, the HC directed unconditional release of the jewellery to the petitioner, emphasizing the respondents acted without jurisdiction in prolonged retention beyond the specified assessment period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
