Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Detention of a passenger's wristwatch by Customs was challenged on the ground that it constituted "personal effects" under the Baggage Rules, 2016 and was therefore not liable to detention. Relying on binding precedent holding that valuables such as jewellery cannot be wholly excluded from "personal effects," the court held that a watch worn by the passenger falls within the ambit of exempt personal effects. Consequently, the continued detention was held untenable and was set aside; Customs was directed to release the watch and warehousing charges were waived. - HC
Detention of a passenger's wristwatch by Customs was challenged on the ground that it constituted "personal effects" under the Baggage Rules, 2016 and was therefore not liable to detention. Relying on binding precedent holding that valuables such as jewellery cannot be wholly excluded from "personal effects," the court held that a watch worn by the passenger falls within the ambit of exempt personal effects. Consequently, the continued detention was held untenable and was set aside; Customs was directed to release the watch and warehousing charges were waived. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.