Delhi High Court has expressed some concerns in respect of the definition of the jewellery in proposed Rule 2(viii) of the Baggage Rules as also the monetary cap being retained, albeit with modification, under proposed Rule 5 of the said Rules.
Delhi High Court held that bail application in case of money laundering and fake investment scheme allowed on account of delayed trial and there being no possibility of the trial concluding in the near future.
Delhi High Court held that penalty imposed on Courier Agency due to non-exercise of due-diligence since courier agency failed to notice that commercial goods were being sent under disguise of gift. Accordingly, petition dismissed.
Delhi High Court upheld reassessment for Agroha Fincap, ruling that the sanction “Yes, I am convinced it is a fit case” meets Section 151 requirements, rejecting the ITAT’s finding of mechanical approval.
Delhi High Court rules ITSC applications filed until March 31, 2021, are valid and must be treated as pending. Retrospective cut-off of February 1, 2021, is arbitrary, violating Article 14.
Dismissing the plea of unawareness of portal notices, the Delhi High Court upheld that assessees must regularly check the GST portal. Yet, to uphold natural justice, it remanded the matter for reconsideration since no reply or personal hearing was granted.
Delhi High Court holds Section 54F exemption valid even if house construction began before sale of asset, reaffirming liberal interpretation of tax relief.
Delhi High Court dismisses petitions, reiterating that both Jurisdictional Assessing Officers (JAO) and Faceless Assessing Officers (FAO) have concurrent jurisdiction to issue Section 148 reassessment notices, holding prior High Court ruling (T.K.S. Builders) is binding.
Delhi High Court held that Petitioner was clearly hand-in-glove with M/s. Balaji [non-existing supplier] and has enabled loss to the exchequer by fraudulently availing ITC without actual supply of goods or services. Accordingly, writ dismissed and order blocking of ITC in electronic cash ledger upheld.
Delhi High Court held that retention of seized property without adhering to section 20 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] is contrary to statutory framework and accordingly unsustainable in law. Hence, present appeal is allowed and order set aside.
