TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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 respondent was to comply with the Tribunal's earlier direction to pay the market price of the confiscated goods and whether failure to do so would justify initiation of contempt proceedings.
Analysis: The Tribunal noted that its earlier order directing implementation had not been complied with within the stipulated time. It also recorded the departmental stand that the matter was in progress and that the market price was being ascertained, but found that no effective action had been taken to implement the order in time. Taking note of the assurance that the matter would be settled by the end of December 1991, the Tribunal fixed a final deadline and directed payment of the market price by that date, with a clear warning that non-compliance would lead to reference of the matter to the High Court for contempt action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Conclusion: The respondent was directed to pay the market price of the goods by the stipulated date, failing which contempt proceedings could be initiated.
Final Conclusion: The application resulted in a binding compliance direction with an express contempt consequence for default.
Ratio Decidendi: A tribunal may issue a final compliance deadline to enforce its earlier order and may place the defaulting party on notice of contempt proceedings for continued non-compliance.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
