Self-assessed bills of entry constitute appealable assessment orders, even without departmental reassessment, a lis or a speaking order. Waiving notice and personal hearing for expedited adjudication does not, absent an informed and express surrender, waive the independent statutory right to challenge tariff classification. In reclassifying Rivet Mobile Contact, Revenue bears the burden of proof; evidence of silver content alone does not resolve classification where dedicated design and use establish its essential character as an electrical contact. The product is excluded from Chapter 71 and classifiable under CTH 8538. Without misdeclaration of description, quantity or value, a bona fide classification dispute alone does not support confiscation, redemption fine or penalty.

Actual-user compliance under an end-use customs exemption is met where imported wind-operated electricity generator parts are used exclusively to erect and commission windmills in the specified turnkey project. The condition requires ultimate use for the prescribed purpose but does not expressly bar movement of components to the project site or transfer of title under supply contracts before final assembly. Continuous ownership by the importer until commissioning is not required where the importer remains responsible for installation and commissioning. Contractual transfer before final assembly therefore does not, by itself, breach the concessional exemption condition.

Medical-device parts and accessories suitable solely or principally for use with a Cell Separator are classifiable with that device under Chapter 90. The residual tariff entry for parts and accessories applies only where the goods are not otherwise specified or included within that Chapter. AMICUS Platelet Kits and similar Cell Separator accessories therefore fall under CTH 9018 rather than the residual CTH 9033 classification. This classification attracts IGST at the rate prescribed for medical devices and related goods under the relevant Schedule entry.

Refusal of a private bonded warehouse licence for cut and polished diamonds cannot rest solely on prior customs adjudication imposing duty, redemption fine and monetary penalties. Regulation 3(2)(c) disqualifies an applicant penalised for an offence under the Customs Act, while civil contraventions attracting monetary penalties remain distinct from criminal offences liable to prosecution. On that distinction, prior adjudication orders did not establish the required disqualification, so the refusal was set aside and the licence application could not be rejected on that basis.

DGFT interpretation of the Foreign Trade Policy is final and binding on Customs, including whether entities qualify as group companies. Common directorial voting control meeting the prescribed threshold permits use of a group company's duty credit scrips and service-export earnings towards an importer's EPCG export obligation. Capital goods for service-sector exemptions include equipment and accessories required directly or indirectly to render services; helicopter parts used for operational transport supporting remote infrastructure projects may qualify on that basis. Aviation permission describing private use does not by itself establish personal use. Extended limitation requires deliberate non-disclosure intended to evade duty, and prior departmental knowledge negates wilful suppression.

At the interim stage, Regulation 18(3) did not prima facie require financial creditors in a class to obtain prior intra-class majority approval through the Authorised Representative before seeking placement of a CoC agenda, where the prescribed voting threshold was met. Suspension of an insolvency professional's registration removes eligibility to act in all ongoing insolvency assignments, not only the process connected with the alleged misconduct. Intimation to other CoCs and the Adjudicating Authority gives effect to that consequence and remains distinct from a CoC's replacement power. Interim stay required a prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury, assessed with public-interest caution; as these were not established, the stay was declined pending appeal.

Section 45(1) of the PMLA permits regular bail for an accused who is sick or infirm. "Sick" and "infirm" operate disjunctively and do not require terminal illness, irreversible deterioration, imminent danger to life, surgery, or hospitalisation. Infirmity may result from substantial physical impairment without an immediate life-threatening condition. Medical needs must be assessed cumulatively, including coexisting conditions and the need for structured, continuous, supervised rehabilitation. Hospital referrals, diagnostic tests, or conservative management do not alone establish adequate care; the material issue is whether custody can effectively deliver the prescribed treatment. Bail safeguards may address risks to witnesses, evidence, investigation, and trial.

Approval of a resolution plan settling confirmed government dues causes the corporate debtor's pending excise appeal to abate. Excise duty remains payable by persons who clear processed fabrics, even where they are not manufacturers, because liability attaches on clearance; however, the transferee's specific penalty concerning stock was not sustained. Pre-clearance grading, cartage, brokerage and stock-interest expenses form part of assessable value where goods enter wholesale trade only on sale to independent buyers, sustaining the related duty and interest. Penalty for intent to evade duty requires findings of prescribed conduct and cannot rest solely on inadmissible valuation deductions. Penalties relating to confiscable goods likewise require their statutory basis; general penalties may instead apply to proven participation in duty evasion.

Classification of railway-specific printed forms turns on their character as products of the printing industry under Chapter 49 rather than paper stationery under Chapter 48. Central excise liability also depends on marketability: forms bearing departmental particulars and usable only for internal railway purposes are not marketable unless the Revenue proves that they can be bought and sold for consideration. Earlier Tribunal decisions on identical goods applied this marketability test and treated the absence of such proof as defeating excise duty, consequential interest, and penalty.

Advance disbursement of September 2026 salary, wages and pensions is authorised on 25 September for central government employees, industrial employees and pensioners because of the proposed bank strike. Payments constitute advance payments and must be adjusted after full monthly entitlements are determined, with any adjustment made from October salary or wages. End-of-month banking transactions should, where feasible, be processed in advance.

Non-substitution of one among several legal representatives does not abate a first appeal where the deceased necessary party's estate remains sufficiently represented by the other heirs and transferees pendente lite. In specific-performance proceedings, the vendor remains necessary despite a pendente lite transfer, but effective representation of the estate permits adjudication. A prior determination that no abatement occurred binds subsequent stages of the same proceeding under res judicata and cannot be reopened by a contrary declaration. Impleading the omitted heir's representatives as pro forma respondents is permissible, and neither condonation of delay nor an application to set aside abatement is required where no abatement arose. Clerical deletion errors may be corrected through inherent and correction powers.

Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 does not require payment merely because organic manure emerges as a by-product during the manufacture of dutiable goods. Organic manure produced through physical mixing of press mud and spent wash remains a by-product of the manufacturing process. Consequently, use of common inputs and input services in manufacturing dutiable goods does not create a Rule 6(3) payment obligation in respect of that by-product, and the related demand is unsustainable.

Pre-show-cause-notice payment of prescribed customs duty, interest and penalty constitutes substantive compliance with section 28(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. Intimation to the proper officer is procedural; failure to provide it within 30 days after issuance of the notice does not defeat the statutory benefit where payment is undisputed. Such payment supports deemed conclusion of proceedings under section 28(6), enabling closure of proceedings in favour of the importer.

Challenge to a subsequent customs order should be pursued through a comprehensive petition rather than by amending the pending petition. Merits contentions concerning both the original petition and the later order remain open for consideration in that challenge. Customs authorities must ensure safe preservation of seized goods, particularly where moisture during the rainy season could cause damage. The request also concerned clarification obtained from the Central Bureau of Narcotics on whether the seized goods could be released.

Alleged non-genuine purchases cannot be treated as unexplained expenditure solely because suppliers fail to respond to verification notices or have cancelled or suspended GST registrations. Where books of account are not rejected, sales are accepted, and no defect appears in the quantitative tally or trading account, supplier non-compliance beyond the taxpayer's control does not displace purchase evidence. Banking-channel payments further support the recorded transactions. Consequently, an addition for alleged non-genuine purchases under the unexplained-expenditure provisions, with consequential higher-rate taxation, is unsustainable on these facts.

Reassessment proceedings require a valid notice under section 143(2) where an assessee's original return is treated, on the assessee's unrebutted request, as the return filed in response to a notice under section 148. The requirement applies after the return is adopted for reassessment under section 147. Failure to issue the notice invalidates the reassessment, rendering the assessment non est and liable to be quashed.

Reassessment notices issued more than three years after the end of the relevant assessment year require prior approval from the senior authorities prescribed for that period. Approval by a Principal Commissioner does not satisfy this requirement where the statute requires approval from a Principal Chief Commissioner, Principal Director General, Chief Commissioner, or Director General. A statutory defect in approval by an incompetent authority cannot be cured by the provision validating technical defects. Consequently, the notice and reassessment lack jurisdiction, and a penalty founded solely on that reassessment cannot survive.

Extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is unsuitable for challenges to assessment additions requiring examination of facts, evidence, and the relevance of transactions to a particular assessment year. Such objections fall within the statutory appellate process rather than writ review. The taxpayer was directed to pursue the appellate remedy, and the appellate authority was required to consider an appeal filed within two weeks without raising limitation objections.

GST portal uploading is a valid mode of service. However, where repeated portal notices receive no response, effective service requires the officer to use alternative modes permitted under the GST Act, preferably registered post with acknowledgement due. An ex parte assessment without a personal hearing in those circumstances provides inadequate opportunity and reduces compliance with natural justice to an empty formality. The assessment was set aside and remitted for fresh consideration, subject to payment of 25% of the disputed tax, filing of objections, and a clear notice for personal hearing.

Effective 1 October 2026, the TDS compliance framework extends to consideration for transfer of immovable property where a resident individual or HUF must deduct tax under section 393(2). Rules 215, 218 and 219 now require the relevant TDS certificate, deposit and statement reporting for such transactions. Form 132 and Form 141 are amended to cover property transfers involving non-resident sellers and resident individual or HUF buyers. New Schedule E in Form 141 requires property, buyer, seller, consideration, instalment and tax-deduction details. Non-resident seller reporting requires contact details, overseas address, tax residency certificate and tax identification information, including where PAN is unavailable.