Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
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...
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.