The High Court noted that the seized bangles were raw gold pieces and directed the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal remedy, ensuring a personal hearing before the appellate authority.
Court held that once neither the alleged seller nor the broker claimed rights in the seized gold, the tribunal’s setting aside of confiscation was no longer tenable. Confiscation of gold and currency was restored, while penalty was set aside as it abated upon death.
The court upheld confiscation of a 250 gm gold bar carried through the green channel without declaration. It ruled that misuse of the green channel and ineligibility under baggage rules justified absolute confiscation and penalty.
The Court ruled that a worn wristwatch qualifies as a passenger’s personal effect under the Baggage Rules, 2016. Customs authorities were directed to release the detained watch as its seizure was held unsustainable.
The court held that seizures carried out and served in another state did not give rise to jurisdiction merely because testing and headquarters were in Delhi, directing parties to the appropriate High Court.
Input tax credit was upheld as the requirement of actual tax deposit by sellers was introduced only prospectively and could not be applied retrospectively.
The court examined an eight-year delay in releasing a sanctioned tax refund. It ruled that such inaction is unacceptable and directed immediate payment with statutory interest.
The Court set aside a 3.5% TDS certificate after the PE finding relied upon by the Revenue was overturned by the ITAT. The earlier 1.5% rate was restored due to lack of legal foundation.
While search proceedings were still pending, the Court permitted release of seized jewellery and cash after petitioners deposited amounts against possible tax demand. No view was taken on merits of explanations.
The court held that an excel sheet found during a search, indicating a cash transaction, constituted valid information to reopen assessment.
