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...
The HC held that the seized gold chain, weighing 132 grams with high purity, is a used personal effect worn by the petitioner, an eligible passenger under the Baggage Rules, 2016. The detention was unlawful as the Customs Department failed to issue a valid show cause notice or provide an opportunity for personal hearing per Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, relying instead on a pre-printed waiver. The court recognized settled law that worn jewellery by passengers, especially foreign visitors, falls within personal effects exempt from detention. Consequently, the petitioner's gold chain shall be released for re-export upon payment of 50% warehouse charges. The petitioner is directed to collect the chain from Customs on a specified date prior to her visa expiry. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
The HC held that the seized gold chain, weighing 132 grams with high purity, is a used personal effect worn by the petitioner, an eligible passenger under the Baggage Rules, 2016. The detention was unlawful as the Customs Department failed to issue a valid show cause notice or provide an opportunity for personal hearing per Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, relying instead on a pre-printed waiver. The court recognized settled law that worn jewellery by passengers, especially foreign visitors, falls within personal effects exempt from detention. Consequently, the petitioner's gold chain shall be released for re-export upon payment of 50% warehouse charges. The petitioner is directed to collect the chain from Customs on a specified date prior to her visa expiry. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
