Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Customs law did not extend to fasten liability on a foreign exporter for pre-amendment transactions where the exporter was outside India and the relevant amendment to Section 1 operated only prospectively from 29 March 2018. The Act placed post-import compliance and responsibility on the Indian importer, and no legal basis was shown to make the foreign exporter answer for the importers' alleged misdeclaration. Penalties under Sections 112 and 114AA also failed because there was no evidence of any act, omission, abetment, false declaration, or other conduct by the petitioners that satisfied the statutory requirements. On that basis, the show-cause notices were quashed as without jurisdiction.
Customs law did not extend to fasten liability on a foreign exporter for pre-amendment transactions where the exporter was outside India and the relevant amendment to Section 1 operated only prospectively from 29 March 2018. The Act placed post-import compliance and responsibility on the Indian importer, and no legal basis was shown to make the foreign exporter answer for the importers' alleged misdeclaration. Penalties under Sections 112 and 114AA also failed because there was no evidence of any act, omission, abetment, false declaration, or other conduct by the petitioners that satisfied the statutory requirements. On that basis, the show-cause notices were quashed as without jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
