Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Proceedings to enforce a post-import exemption condition under Notification No. 64/88 were barred by limitation even though the obligation was continuing in nature. The HC held that section 159A of the Customs Act could not extend the time limit beyond the period prescribed under section 28; after rescission of the notification on 01.03.1994, the outer five-year period expired on 28.02.1999. As the show cause notice was issued only on 27.12.1999, the confiscation action was time-barred. Because the confiscation proceedings failed on limitation, the consequential penalty also could not survive.
Proceedings to enforce a post-import exemption condition under Notification No. 64/88 were barred by limitation even though the obligation was continuing in nature. The HC held that section 159A of the Customs Act could not extend the time limit beyond the period prescribed under section 28; after rescission of the notification on 01.03.1994, the outer five-year period expired on 28.02.1999. As the show cause notice was issued only on 27.12.1999, the confiscation action was time-barred. Because the confiscation proceedings failed on limitation, the consequential penalty also could not survive.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.