Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Denial of cross-examination in adjudication proceedings alleging fraudulent exports and overvaluation to wrongfully claim duty drawback was held not to violate natural justice. Cross-examination is not an absolute right; the requesting party must show specific prejudice and explain why it is necessary for substantial justice. The request was found vague, unsupported by reasons, and indicative of delaying tactics, particularly where many co-noticees were non-existent or failed to appear and the officials acted in their official capacity. Given the allegation that the co-noticees were set up by the petitioner, lack of bona fides was inferred. The challenge failed and the impugned order was upheld. - HC
Denial of cross-examination in adjudication proceedings alleging fraudulent exports and overvaluation to wrongfully claim duty drawback was held not to violate natural justice. Cross-examination is not an absolute right; the requesting party must show specific prejudice and explain why it is necessary for substantial justice. The request was found vague, unsupported by reasons, and indicative of delaying tactics, particularly where many co-noticees were non-existent or failed to appear and the officials acted in their official capacity. Given the allegation that the co-noticees were set up by the petitioner, lack of bona fides was inferred. The challenge failed and the impugned order was upheld. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
