The judgment clarified the distinction between personal and newly purchased gold, allowing the petitioner to contest confiscation under customs regulations.
The court upheld the trial court’s decision permitting the Income Tax Department to place additional notices on record. Key takeaway: Section 91 Cr.P.C. may be invoked at any stage for documents necessary for fair adjudication.
Court upholds ITAT’s refusal to stay tax recovery, citing the petitioner’s prolonged inaction and failure to meet conditions. Key takeaway: procedural lapses undermined the stay request.
Delhi High Court set aside the GST SCN and consequent order after petitioner was not given a proper opportunity to file a reply or attend a personal hearing. Matter remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Delhi High Court remanded the GST SCN for Financial Year 2019-20 after petitioner failed to respond due to consultant oversight. Costs of Rs. 20,000 were imposed, with the matter to be reconsidered after personal hearing.
Delhi High Court dismisses writ petition challenging GST order, directing taxpayers to use statutory appeal under Section 107 due to complex ITC fraud investigations.
The Delhi High Court directed the Customs Department to release a gold chain and an iPhone, noting prior delays and non-compliance. Officials were warned against prolonging passenger hardship.
Delhi High Court stayed the provisional attachment of the petitioner’s bank account, allowing filing of appeal against assessment order without further pre-deposit, pending departmental adjudication.
The Delhi High Court held that interest must be paid after refund re-credit was delayed because PMT-03 did not reflect due to technical glitches. The Court directed authorities to process and sanction the interest within two months.
The Court held that a provisional bank account attachment under Section 83 had lapsed because the statutory one-year validity period had already expired. It ordered de-freezing of the account while allowing show cause proceedings to continue.
