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...
HC considered whether an existing Prohibition Order and Seizure Order could continue after remand where no confiscation proposal under Section 67(2) had been issued. The court observed no de novo orders were passed post-remand and, because notices did not propose confiscation, held that continuation of prohibition or seizure could not be sustained. Consequently the impugned Prohibition and Seizure Orders were quashed and the writ petition allowed.
HC considered whether an existing Prohibition Order and Seizure Order could continue after remand where no confiscation proposal under Section 67(2) had been issued. The court observed no de novo orders were passed post-remand and, because notices did not propose confiscation, held that continuation of prohibition or seizure could not be sustained. Consequently the impugned Prohibition and Seizure Orders were quashed and the writ petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
