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" ?
Section 122(1A) is construed to cover "any person" other than the taxable person where that person retained the benefit of the contravening transactions and acted at whose instance they were done; on that basis, partners of a firm can be proceeded against if those factual conditions are recorded. The provision is treated as complementary to Section 122(1), not as creating a new independent offence, so it may apply to transactions predating 1 January 2021 if the show-cause notice was issued after the provision came into force. The writ challenge was rejected, while the petitioners were left free to contest the factual findings before the Appellate Tribunal.
Section 122(1A) is construed to cover "any person" other than the taxable person where that person retained the benefit of the contravening transactions and acted at whose instance they were done; on that basis, partners of a firm can be proceeded against if those factual conditions are recorded. The provision is treated as complementary to Section 122(1), not as creating a new independent offence, so it may apply to transactions predating 1 January 2021 if the show-cause notice was issued after the provision came into force. The writ challenge was rejected, while the petitioners were left free to contest the factual findings before the Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.