Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Challenge to a demand order for alleged fraudulent availment of ITC was rejected as the noticee failed to reply to the show cause notice despite being aware of the investigation, and personal hearing intimations sent to the registered email were held duly served, rendering the non-service plea false. Issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years was held permissible, as analysis across "periods" can be necessary to establish a pattern of fraud. On adjudicatory jurisdiction, it was held that in multi-noticee matters jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Writ jurisdiction was declined given disputed facts and availability of statutory appeal; the petition was dismissed with exemplary costs. - HC
Challenge to a demand order for alleged fraudulent availment of ITC was rejected as the noticee failed to reply to the show cause notice despite being aware of the investigation, and personal hearing intimations sent to the registered email were held duly served, rendering the non-service plea false. Issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years was held permissible, as analysis across "periods" can be necessary to establish a pattern of fraud. On adjudicatory jurisdiction, it was held that in multi-noticee matters jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Writ jurisdiction was declined given disputed facts and availability of statutory appeal; the petition was dismissed with exemplary costs. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.