Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
The HC held that Rule 18 permits anti-dumping duty to be imposed only within three months from publication of the final findings under Rule 17. As no notification had been issued within that statutory period, the window for acting on the findings had closed. The Court therefore held that the Central Government could no longer act upon the impugned final findings, and the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous.
The HC held that Rule 18 permits anti-dumping duty to be imposed only within three months from publication of the final findings under Rule 17. As no notification had been issued within that statutory period, the window for acting on the findings had closed. The Court therefore held that the Central Government could no longer act upon the impugned final findings, and the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
