#Reason to Believe

CESTAT Kolkata set aside confiscation of unmarked gold seized from a domestic passenger, ruling revenue must first prove foreign origin before Section 123's reverse burden applies. The tribunal held that possession of unmarked gold on a domestic flight alone cannot trigger the smuggling presumption without foundational evidence of foreign source.

Gauhati High Court rules that provisional attachment orders under PMLA Section 5 must explicitly disclose the 'reason to believe' to comply with natural justice. The court also clarifies that properties representing proceeds of crime can be attached even if acquired before the scheduled offence, reinforcing ED's attachment powers.

ITAT Ahmedabad quashed a reassessment notice under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the Assessing Officer’s satisfaction must be based on independent application of mind and tangible evidence linking the assessee to escaped income. The Tribunal emphasized that borrowed satisfaction or conjectural reasoning violates natural justice and renders the reassessment void.

ITAT Ahmedabad quashed reassessment proceedings under Section 147 IT Act, ruling that unverified investigation reports without a live nexus to the assessee’s transactions fail to constitute valid tangible material. The tribunal emphasized that reopening assessments based on mere suspicion or third-party reports violates natural justice and the statutory threshold for escapement.

ITAT Delhi rules that reassessment under Section 147 IT Act cannot be initiated based on suspicion or fund rotation alone. The assessing officer must establish tangible material showing a direct nexus between the evidence and the belief of income escapement, setting a higher threshold for reopening assessments.

Bombay HC rules cash cannot be seized under Section 67(2) of the CGST Act without concrete evidence linking it to GST evasion. The judgment mandates a direct nexus between seized cash and alleged tax violations, reinforcing procedural safeguards for taxpayers against arbitrary seizures.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that Section 17 PMLA searches require credible material establishing proceeds of crime; mere suspicion or scheduled offence insufficient.