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...
The dominant issue was whether the appellate tribunal could, in an assessee's appeal, set aside the adjudicating authority's unchallenged direction permitting redemption fine and re-export, and thereby sustain absolute confiscation. Since the Department neither filed an appeal nor cross-objections and did not invoke statutory review remedies, the redemption and re-export direction had attained finality and did not arise from the assessee's grounds. Despite the tribunal's wide powers under the statute, it could not travel beyond the scope of the appeal to grant relief adverse to the assessee on an aspect not under challenge, amounting to excess of jurisdiction. The tribunal's interference was therefore set aside and the appeal was allowed. - HC
The dominant issue was whether the appellate tribunal could, in an assessee's appeal, set aside the adjudicating authority's unchallenged direction permitting redemption fine and re-export, and thereby sustain absolute confiscation. Since the Department neither filed an appeal nor cross-objections and did not invoke statutory review remedies, the redemption and re-export direction had attained finality and did not arise from the assessee's grounds. Despite the tribunal's wide powers under the statute, it could not travel beyond the scope of the appeal to grant relief adverse to the assessee on an aspect not under challenge, amounting to excess of jurisdiction. The tribunal's interference was therefore set aside and the appeal was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.