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 the final assessment order dated 31.08.2016 is barred by limitation. The court ruled that where an objection is filed, the AO must determine both receipt date of the draft assessment order and whether the objection was filed within the 30-day period prescribed by s.144C(2); only an objection filed within that period restrains the AO from completing assessment. The AO could not lawfully rely on the assessee's asserted service date without verifying actual delivery (e.g., postal tracking) and, having failed to exercise due diligence, wrongly computed the 30-day period from 14.03.2016. Because the objection was belated, the Tribunal rightly found the assessment time-barred.
HC held that the final assessment order dated 31.08.2016 is barred by limitation. The court ruled that where an objection is filed, the AO must determine both receipt date of the draft assessment order and whether the objection was filed within the 30-day period prescribed by s.144C(2); only an objection filed within that period restrains the AO from completing assessment. The AO could not lawfully rely on the assessee's asserted service date without verifying actual delivery (e.g., postal tracking) and, having failed to exercise due diligence, wrongly computed the 30-day period from 14.03.2016. Because the objection was belated, the Tribunal rightly found the assessment time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
