Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Provisional attachment under the PMLA was upheld where the order itself recorded that the immovable property represented proceeds of crime, so there was no need for later supplementation of reasons. The Court held that attachment is confined to property having a nexus with the scheduled offence; property acquired before commission of the offence does not ordinarily fall within the definition of proceeds of crime, and equivalent-value attachment is limited to property derived from criminal activity taken or held outside India. However, the appellant failed to prove on the record that the attached property was in fact acquired before the alleged offence period, so the challenge to attachment failed.
Provisional attachment under the PMLA was upheld where the order itself recorded that the immovable property represented proceeds of crime, so there was no need for later supplementation of reasons. The Court held that attachment is confined to property having a nexus with the scheduled offence; property acquired before commission of the offence does not ordinarily fall within the definition of proceeds of crime, and equivalent-value attachment is limited to property derived from criminal activity taken or held outside India. However, the appellant failed to prove on the record that the attached property was in fact acquired before the alleged offence period, so the challenge to attachment failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.