Jurisprudentiol – Tomorrow's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Customs

Onus to prove undervaluation is on the Revenue – Department’s appeal against undervaluation ends up in dismissal with costs : Supreme Court

The Apex Court observed that the assessing authority as also the appellate authority have wrongly proceeded on the basis that the onus of proof was on the importer. If that conclusion is not premised on any legal principle and the revenue having not brought on records any contemporaneous evidence to the contrary, it cannot be said to have discharged its burden.

Income Tax

No penalty is leviable when unproved income is offered to purchase peace – High Court not to discuss perversity of Tribunal’s order when that was not the question raised before it : SC

The decision of the Tribunal on the facts can be gone into by the High Court in the reference jurisdiction only if a question has been referred to it which says that the finding arrived at by the Tribunal on the facts is perverse, in the sense that no reasonable person could have taken such a view. Since the frame of the question was not as to whether the findings recorded by the Tribunal on facts were perverse, the High Court was precluded from entering into any discussion regarding the perversity of the finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal

FERA

FERA - No question of law involved in appeals - On the facts, case has been decided on basis of voluminous material available and findings are not perverse - is not a fit case for interference - appeals summarily dismissed by Bombay HC

There is no question of law involved in these appeals. On the facts, the case has been decided on the basis of voluminous material available and it is not possible to draw an inference that the findings are perverse. The appeals are summarily dismissed.

See our columns tomorrow for the judgements