The tribunal clarified that limited education or lack of familiarity with foreign exchange rules cannot justify violations of FEMA. Nevertheless, it reduced the penalty considering the circumstances surrounding the incident.
PMLA Tribunal held ₹50 lakh seized in a CBI trap is proceeds of crime and can be attached under PMLA even if the cash is already in court custody pending the criminal trial.
The tribunal ruled that the amount of penalty under Section 13(1) of FEMA is discretionary and depends on facts and circumstances of each case. As the adjudicating authority had already imposed significant penalties after evaluating the evidence, no grounds existed for enhancement.
PMLA Tribunal upheld attachment of wife’s property linked to fraud proceeds, ruling assets can be attached even if the owner is not accused in the scheduled offence.
The Bengaluru CGST zone cautioned taxpayers about individuals posing as GST officers. Taxpayers were advised to verify officer identity, authorization, and DIN before allowing inspections.
The customs authority clarified procedures for export cargo returning to Indian ports due to maritime disruptions. The circular prescribes verification, cancellation of export documents, and safeguards to prevent wrongful export incentive claims.
The High Court ruled that retrospective cancellation of GST registration is invalid if such action is not proposed in the original show cause notice. The judgment emphasizes adherence to natural justice and proper reasoning in administrative orders.
ITAT Hyderabad held that the Supreme Court’s COVID-19 limitation extensions apply only to judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings and not to statutory deadlines like filing TDS statements. Consequently, the levy of late filing fee under section 234E was upheld for delayed TDS returns.
Gujarat High Court quashed reassessment proceedings after finding that deduction claim under section 35(2AB) had already been examined during original scrutiny assessment. Reopening based on same material was held to be a change of opinion and therefore invalid.
The ITAT Chennai held that an application filed after the extended deadline should be examined under the amended Section 80G provisions introduced by the Finance Act 2024. The Tribunal directed the authority to reconsider the application under the new clause allowing filing after commencement of activities.
