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...

Income Tax | Assessing Officer Can Complete Assessment If No Objections Before Dispute Resolution Panel: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has held that objections to a draft assessment order under Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, must be filed before the Dispute Resolution Panel as well as the Assessing Officer and that filing them before the Assessing Officer alone will not do. It held that where no objections are filed before the Dispute Resolution Panel, the Assessing Officer may finalise the assessment on the basis of the draft order itself. Section 144C of the Income...

CESTAT Must Issue Fresh Notice If Bench Does Not Sit On Fixed Hearing Date: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that where no bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal sits on the date fixed for hearing so that no judicial order comes to be passed fixing the next date, the Tribunal must issue a fresh notice to the party intimating the next date and place of hearing. It held that an appeal decided ex parte on such an unnotified date is decided without affording the appellant due opportunity of hearing. Rule 18(1) of the Customs,...

Income Tax Act | 18-Month Period To Decide Settlement Application Cannot Restart On Transfer Between Interim Boards: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has recently held that the period of 18 months for deciding a settlement application under Section 245D(4A)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, begins to run when the application first stands allotted to an Interim Board for Settlement and does not begin afresh when the Central Board of Direct Taxes later transfers the application from one Interim Board to another. Section 245D(4A)(iii) of the Act requires an order under Section 245D(4) to be...

Builder Must Pay Delayed Possession Interest At Rate It Could Charge Allottee For Default: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has recently held that the interest a builder must pay an allottee for delay in handing over possession under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, is the same rate that the builder could have charged the allottee had the allottee defaulted. Rejecting a builder's plea that its liability was confined to MCLR+1%, the Court upheld an award of interest at 24% per annum because the builder-buyer agreement itself provided for...

Arbitrators Can Decide Contractual Tax Disputes, Not Statutory Tax Issues: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has recently held that tax disputes between contracting parties, where a party must bear or reimburse a tax, may be resolved through arbitration. However, questions involving statutory tax rates, classification, assessment or quantification remain within the exclusive domain of tax authorities. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh partly set aside the GST-related portions of an arbitral award granting over...