The Court held that a provisional attachment order under Section 83 ceases to operate after one year. As the order had expired, the bank and Sub-Registrar were directed not to restrict transactions.
Delhi High Court held that successive Bail Application filed with no change in circumstances is liable to be dismissed. Further, bail application is dismissed since applicant has already been declared an offender.
The Court held that the Department could not establish delivery of hearing notices or the order dispatched through speed post. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after providing documents and a proper hearing.
The Court held that pre-SCN consultation became discretionary after the 2020 amendment, rendering the petitioner’s challenge untenable. It directed the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal.
The Court held that the tax authority wrongly dismissed a delay condonation plea without considering the assessee’s serious medical condition. The ruling emphasizes that genuine hardship must be evaluated liberally under Section 119(2)(b).
The Court held that the delay in paying redemption fine, arising during the COVID-19 period, could be condoned. It ordered implementation of the original decision allowing re-export of the seized gold.
The Court held that ownership of detained gold bangles was disputed, making a writ petition inappropriate. The petitioner was directed to file an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).
Court held that C-Forms could not be refused solely because inter-state purchases were mistakenly omitted from revised returns. The ruling directs issuance of Forms as transactions were genuine and no revenue loss occurred.
Delhi High Court ruled that prosecution under Income Tax Act Sections 276C and 278E can proceed when evaded tax exceeds Rs.25 crores, even if appeals are pending, confirming proper authority delegation.
Delhi High Court remits Rs. 3.05 Cr CGST demand for re-adjudication after observing the Proper Officer did not consider the petitioner’s detailed reply and failed to provide opportunity to clarify.
