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...
Delay in filing customs appeals beyond the statutory period of 60 days, plus the further condonable 30 days, cannot be condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal found the explanation for delay factually inadequate because the affidavits lacked specific particulars and dates, and the appellants had not consistently claimed that both partners were outside India. Relying on Singh Enterprises, it held that section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded where the statute fixes the maximum condonable period. The appeals were therefore upheld as time-barred, and the Commissioner (Appeals) had no jurisdiction to entertain them.
Delay in filing customs appeals beyond the statutory period of 60 days, plus the further condonable 30 days, cannot be condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal found the explanation for delay factually inadequate because the affidavits lacked specific particulars and dates, and the appellants had not consistently claimed that both partners were outside India. Relying on Singh Enterprises, it held that section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded where the statute fixes the maximum condonable period. The appeals were therefore upheld as time-barred, and the Commissioner (Appeals) had no jurisdiction to entertain them.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.