Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
Sections 112(a), 112(b) and 114AA are characterised as onerous penalty provisions and require the department to make specific, pointed findings establishing serious violations and an intention to evade duty before imposing penalties; mere reliance on a retracted statement and bills of entry without detailing the petitioner's role, the false declaration attributed to them, or the value misdeclared is inadequate. Confiscation must operate as the predicate for penal liability. The document concludes that the existing order lacks substantive reasoned findings and directs a fresh hearing and a reasoned de novo adjudication with specific charges delineating the petitioner's role.
Sections 112(a), 112(b) and 114AA are characterised as onerous penalty provisions and require the department to make specific, pointed findings establishing serious violations and an intention to evade duty before imposing penalties; mere reliance on a retracted statement and bills of entry without detailing the petitioner's role, the false declaration attributed to them, or the value misdeclared is inadequate. Confiscation must operate as the predicate for penal liability. The document concludes that the existing order lacks substantive reasoned findings and directs a fresh hearing and a reasoned de novo adjudication with specific charges delineating the petitioner's role.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.