Borrower Can Directly Challenge Recovery Officer's Auction Sale Confirmation Before DRT: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a borrower can directly challenge an order of the Recovery Officer confirming an auction sale before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 30(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. The court clarified that the borrower need not first approach the Recovery Officer under Rule 60 or Rule 61 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961. It also held that the borrower is not required to make the deposits...

Time-Barred Claim Order Is Arbitral Award, Superfluous Termination Remark Cannot Bar Challenge: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that an arbitral tribunal's decision rejecting a claim as time-barred is a final arbitral award. It said that a separate observation terminating the proceedings under Section 32(2)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, was unnecessary and could not be used to deny the claimant a challenge to the award. Referring to Section 32(2)(c), the bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra held “The said provision has nothing...

CBIC Circular Cannot Override Provisional Release Of Seized Goods Under Customs Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has held that Customs authorities cannot deny provisional release of seized goods merely because an executive instruction places such goods outside the scope of provisional release. The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary held that CBIC Circular No. 35/2017-Cus. dated 16.08.2017 cannot dilute the scope of Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962, by prohibiting provisional release of goods notified under Section 123 of the Act. ...

Substantial Question Of Law Essential For Appeal Under RERA Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that an appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is maintainable only where a substantial question of law arises, and that an order by which the Appellate Tribunal remands a matter to the Regulatory Authority, without finally determining the rights of either party, gives rise to no such question. Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 permits a person aggrieved by a decision or...

GST Act | Scrutiny Of Returns Under S. 61 Not A Precondition For Show Cause Notice Under S. 74A: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that scrutiny of returns under Section 61 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 99 of the CGST Rules, 2017, is not a mandatory step before the department issues a show cause notice under Section 74A of the Act. It held that where the notice rests on independent verification and not merely on discrepancies in the assessee's own returns, the department need not first call for the assessee's explanation under Section 61.The bench of Justice...

Section 123 Customs Act Needs Traceable Proof Of Lawfully Acquiring Seized Goods: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 3 September held that an owner of seized goods does not discharge the burden under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 merely by producing documents relating to his business generally, and must instead produce documents that specifically and traceably establish lawful acquisition of the seized goods. A Division Bench comprising Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary held that the burden shifted to the owner after the revenue satisfied the conditions...

Customs Must Establish Foreign Origin Before Presuming Goods Were Smuggled: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has recently held that the burden of proof under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962, does not shift to the person from whom goods are seized unless the customs authorities first establish that the goods are of foreign origin and were smuggled into India. it held that where nothing on the record connects the goods to smuggling, the presumption cannot be pressed into service at all. The Court applied the rule to silver bullion and to Indian...

Borrower Cannot Demand Hearing Before Magistrate U/S 14 SARFAESI Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 25 August held that a borrower has no right to a hearing before the District Magistrate passes an order under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), as the Magistrate does not adjudicate disputes between the borrower and secured creditor.Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act enables a secured creditor to approach the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate having...

Turnover Cannot Be Enhanced Without Quantifying Suppression Found During Survey: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 25 August held that turnover cannot be enhanced merely on the ground of alleged suppression when the actual figure of suppression has not been identified, observing that even where the books of account are rejected, the enhancement must correspond to the suppression found during the survey. Justice Piyush Agrawal allowed the revision filed by B.T.C. Industries Pvt. Ltd. and set aside the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Bareilly Division, holding that the...

Arbitration Act Sec. 11(6) Is Default Provision, Can't Override Agreed 3-Member Tribunal: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court on 20 August held that Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is a default provision that can be invoked only when parties are unable to secure the appointment of an arbitrator through the procedure agreed upon in their contract, and cannot be used to replace an agreed three-member tribunal with a sole arbitrator. Justice Jaspreet Singh dismissed S. H. Infratech Pvt. Ltd's petition seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator, holding that where a party...

GST Authority Finding In Assessment Proceedings May Affect Criminal Case: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 11 August held that where assessment proceedings under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 end in a finding that a taxpayer has not violated the law, such finding may have a bearing on criminal prosecution arising from the same allegations, even though the two proceedings are independent. Justice Vikram D. Chauhan made the observation while granting bail to Javed Akhtar, who was accused of fraudulently availing input tax credit, noting that no proceedings...

GST | Party Contesting Notice On Merits, Challenging Jurisdiction After Adverse Order Hit By Doctrine Of Election: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has recently held that a taxpayer who appeared before the tax officer and contested a show cause notice on merits and raised the objection of want of jurisdiction only after the penalty order went against him is hit by the doctrine of election and ought to be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy. The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary held “We are conscious of the settled legal position that a...