Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
An ex parte ad interim injunction restraining a statutory director-removal process was held maintainable in appeal, but the injunction itself was unsustainable. The court held that director status under Section 2(34) is functional and does not depend on shareholding; once appointed and filed in office, the person remains subject to removal under Section 169. It further held that Section 430 barred civil court interference with internal corporate action, and lack of locus before the tribunal did not revive civil jurisdiction because a waiver route was available. The injunction also failed because the order gave no reasoned satisfaction on prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
An ex parte ad interim injunction restraining a statutory director-removal process was held maintainable in appeal, but the injunction itself was unsustainable. The court held that director status under Section 2(34) is functional and does not depend on shareholding; once appointed and filed in office, the person remains subject to removal under Section 169. It further held that Section 430 barred civil court interference with internal corporate action, and lack of locus before the tribunal did not revive civil jurisdiction because a waiver route was available. The injunction also failed because the order gave no reasoned satisfaction on prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
