Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
HC held that service of ITAT order upon assessee's Chartered Accountant does not constitute sufficient service on the assessee under Section 260A appeal provisions. The statutory scheme requires ITAT to ensure direct communication to the assessee within the prescribed 120-day limitation period. Despite Revenue's contention that service on authorized representative suffices, the Court disagreed, emphasizing ITAT's mandatory obligation to serve copies directly on assessees. The Applicant's claim of ignorance regarding the 2016 order until receiving recovery notice in 2024 was accepted, as the CA could not confirm delivery to the assessee. Consequently, the 40-day delay in filing appeals was condoned, allowing determination on merits.
HC held that service of ITAT order upon assessee's Chartered Accountant does not constitute sufficient service on the assessee under Section 260A appeal provisions. The statutory scheme requires ITAT to ensure direct communication to the assessee within the prescribed 120-day limitation period. Despite Revenue's contention that service on authorized representative suffices, the Court disagreed, emphasizing ITAT's mandatory obligation to serve copies directly on assessees. The Applicant's claim of ignorance regarding the 2016 order until receiving recovery notice in 2024 was accepted, as the CA could not confirm delivery to the assessee. Consequently, the 40-day delay in filing appeals was condoned, allowing determination on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.