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...
The HC allowed the writ petitions and quashed and set aside the impugned show-cause notices issued to the petitioners dated 13.02.2025 and 23.05.2025. The court held the notices under Rule 4(2) read with s.31 of the GVAT Act lacked any communicated opinion or tangible material evidencing turnover escaping assessment, amounting to impermissible reopening and review in the absence of cogent grounds; further the reassessment demands were time-barred under the statutory eight-year limitation. Separately, provisions conferring unfettered discretion (notably s.6 and the exemption in s.22) were declared constitutionally invalid for constituting uncanalised, arbitrary delegation of taxing power without guiding principles or safeguards.
The HC allowed the writ petitions and quashed and set aside the impugned show-cause notices issued to the petitioners dated 13.02.2025 and 23.05.2025. The court held the notices under Rule 4(2) read with s.31 of the GVAT Act lacked any communicated opinion or tangible material evidencing turnover escaping assessment, amounting to impermissible reopening and review in the absence of cogent grounds; further the reassessment demands were time-barred under the statutory eight-year limitation. Separately, provisions conferring unfettered discretion (notably s.6 and the exemption in s.22) were declared constitutionally invalid for constituting uncanalised, arbitrary delegation of taxing power without guiding principles or safeguards.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.