Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A review order restoring pending appeals was treated as a consequence of the liberty expressly reserved in the earlier appellate order and of the Supreme Court's recall of the binding precedent. The HC held that, where the Tribunal allowed review and restored the appeals in terms of that liberty, the appellants could not challenge the restoration by disputing review power or limitation. It further held that an order granting review and reviving the main appeal is interlocutory and not independently appealable, because the CPC applies to the Tribunal and the bar in Order 47 Rule 7 CPC operates against an appeal from such a review order. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable.
A review order restoring pending appeals was treated as a consequence of the liberty expressly reserved in the earlier appellate order and of the Supreme Court's recall of the binding precedent. The HC held that, where the Tribunal allowed review and restored the appeals in terms of that liberty, the appellants could not challenge the restoration by disputing review power or limitation. It further held that an order granting review and reviving the main appeal is interlocutory and not independently appealable, because the CPC applies to the Tribunal and the bar in Order 47 Rule 7 CPC operates against an appeal from such a review order. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
