Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Statements recorded during inquiry under the Customs Act are admissible for proving their truth only if the deponent is examined as a witness before the adjudicating authority and the authority forms an opinion to admit them, followed by opportunity for cross examination; this mandatory procedure in analogous provisions for customs and central excise neutralises coercion risk. The impugned penalty rested solely on inquiry statements recorded without following that procedure, so such statements could not sustain a penalty for abetment under the customs penalty provision. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the appellants was quashed and the appeals allowed.
Statements recorded during inquiry under the Customs Act are admissible for proving their truth only if the deponent is examined as a witness before the adjudicating authority and the authority forms an opinion to admit them, followed by opportunity for cross examination; this mandatory procedure in analogous provisions for customs and central excise neutralises coercion risk. The impugned penalty rested solely on inquiry statements recorded without following that procedure, so such statements could not sustain a penalty for abetment under the customs penalty provision. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the appellants was quashed and the appeals allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.