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...
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.