Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the seized foreign currency is not a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act and therefore the onus lies upon the Revenue to prove that the currency was not obtained from authorized sources. The Tribunal found no evidence of smuggling, recognized the appellant's legitimate means of income (former academic and subsequent US employment), and concluded that absolute confiscation and penal measures were not warranted. The AIU officer was held to lack jurisdiction to investigate the foreign currency matter. Consequently, confiscation and penalty were set aside and the seized currency must be returned absent affirmative proof by the Revenue to the contrary.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the seized foreign currency is not a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act and therefore the onus lies upon the Revenue to prove that the currency was not obtained from authorized sources. The Tribunal found no evidence of smuggling, recognized the appellant's legitimate means of income (former academic and subsequent US employment), and concluded that absolute confiscation and penal measures were not warranted. The AIU officer was held to lack jurisdiction to investigate the foreign currency matter. Consequently, confiscation and penalty were set aside and the seized currency must be returned absent affirmative proof by the Revenue to the contrary.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
