Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
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...
A concession-based statement in Amba Lal was treated as non-binding because the Supreme Court had not independently decided the legal issue, so it could not govern the appellant's claim for release of imported goods for home consumption. The Tribunal then applied the principle that a beneficial amending notification operates retrospectively: although confiscation and penalty were justified when the goods were prohibited, the later notification changed their status to restricted before the order was passed. Redemption should therefore have been allowed for home consumption, subject to payment of enhanced value, duty and interest, rather than confining the goods to re-export.
A concession-based statement in Amba Lal was treated as non-binding because the Supreme Court had not independently decided the legal issue, so it could not govern the appellant's claim for release of imported goods for home consumption. The Tribunal then applied the principle that a beneficial amending notification operates retrospectively: although confiscation and penalty were justified when the goods were prohibited, the later notification changed their status to restricted before the order was passed. Redemption should therefore have been allowed for home consumption, subject to payment of enhanced value, duty and interest, rather than confining the goods to re-export.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.