Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
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.