Delhi High Court directs refund to traveler for gold confiscated in 2014 due to customs inaction. Refund order to be issued within one month.
The Delhi High Court quashed a reassessment notice issued to Janus Infrastructure Projects for AY 2014-15, as it exceeded the 10-year limit under Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, as amended in 2021.
Delhi High Court directs CA Yogendra Singh Balyan to appeal penalty order in alleged fraudulent duty drawback case; declines writ petition.
Delhi High Court directs directors penalised in GST evasion case to use appellate remedies, clarifies ‘any person’ liability under CGST Act.
Delhi High Court held that mere rejection of the Petitioner’s request for cross-examination cannot be treated as a sufficient ground to bypass the statutorily prescribed appellate remedy and invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, writ disposed of.
Delhi High Court held that reassessment order passed under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act beyond the scope of notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act is not sustainable and liable to be set aside.
The present case revolves around the Duty Drawback Scheme. This scheme has become the subject of misuse by some traders/ exporters who make fraudulent exports merely with a view of availing the benefits under the scheme.
The petitioner, essentially, impugns a notice dated 22.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 inter alia, on the ground that it has been issued beyond the period of limitation as specified under Section 149(1)(a) of the Act.
Delhi High Court held that repeated placing and removing from the call book is not valid justification for non-adjudication of show cause notice for more than 10 years. Accordingly, order passed after 10 years is not sustainable and liable to be quashed.
Delhi High Court held that imposition of penalty justified since appellant holding IEC registration ought to have acted responsibly and ensured that the same was not misused by any third party. Thus, penalty imposed on the appellant justified since appellant was aware of IEC being misused.
