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...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 96136 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that where the Tribunal recorded the assessee's challenge that approval under section 153D had been granted mechanically and without application of mind, but did not expressly decide that ground, the order could not stand. Because the Tribunal also had not tested the linked contention that the notice under section 153A was issued at the Joint Commissioner's dictate, the Court refused to speculate on the Tribunal's reasoning. It set aside the impugned order for want of proper forensic consideration and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication of all relevant issues, with liberty to file additional pleadings. The merits were not decided.
HC held that where the Tribunal recorded the assessee's challenge that approval under section 153D had been granted mechanically and without application of mind, but did not expressly decide that ground, the order could not stand. Because the Tribunal also had not tested the linked contention that the notice under section 153A was issued at the Joint Commissioner's dictate, the Court refused to speculate on the Tribunal's reasoning. It set aside the impugned order for want of proper forensic consideration and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication of all relevant issues, with liberty to file additional pleadings. The merits were not decided.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.