TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the acquittal for contravention of licence conditions under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 called for interference in appeal.
Analysis: The evidence showed that although the export obligations were not met within the original time, the competent authority extended the period up to 17-8-1992 and the export obligations were fulfilled within that extended period. In an appeal against acquittal, interference is warranted only when the trial court's view is illegal, improper, or perverse. The settled principle is that an appellate court must also bear in mind the double presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, and if two reasonable views are possible, the acquittal should not be disturbed.
Conclusion: The acquittal was not shown to be perverse or contrary to law, and no interference was warranted.
TaxTMI 
