Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
HC held that the Customs Department unlawfully seized and disposed of passengers' gold jewellery exceeding 400 grams, failed to account for proceeds of disposal, and issued a deficient refund order addressing only appraised value without recording disposal or redemption permissions by the OIO. The court found the Department's refusal to pay amounts due to the petitioners, despite the OIO attaining finality, amounted to deprivation of property without legal authority. The matter was treated as a grave procedural and statutory breach warranting further adjudication and was directed to be listed for hearing on 22 September 2025 for appropriate remedial orders.
HC held that the Customs Department unlawfully seized and disposed of passengers' gold jewellery exceeding 400 grams, failed to account for proceeds of disposal, and issued a deficient refund order addressing only appraised value without recording disposal or redemption permissions by the OIO. The court found the Department's refusal to pay amounts due to the petitioners, despite the OIO attaining finality, amounted to deprivation of property without legal authority. The matter was treated as a grave procedural and statutory breach warranting further adjudication and was directed to be listed for hearing on 22 September 2025 for appropriate remedial orders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
