Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The AT allowed the appeal, holding the impugned attachment and freeze unlawful for breach of natural justice due to non-supply of relied-upon documents (RUDs) with the show-cause notice; several RUDs, including investigative reports and FIRs, were integral to the reasons to believe and were not furnished. The Tribunal found that peripheral factual disputes (shareholding quantum, timing/repayment of loans, proprietary rights, and proportionality of seizure) became moot once procedural illegality was established. The respondents are directed to return seized movable assets, digital devices and records and to de-freeze the appellant's bank accounts within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Appeal allowed.
The AT allowed the appeal, holding the impugned attachment and freeze unlawful for breach of natural justice due to non-supply of relied-upon documents (RUDs) with the show-cause notice; several RUDs, including investigative reports and FIRs, were integral to the reasons to believe and were not furnished. The Tribunal found that peripheral factual disputes (shareholding quantum, timing/repayment of loans, proprietary rights, and proportionality of seizure) became moot once procedural illegality was established. The respondents are directed to return seized movable assets, digital devices and records and to de-freeze the appellant's bank accounts within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.