Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 129A of the Customs Act does not create a Tribunal appeal where the underlying statute does not provide one. In the context of the Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Regulations, 2010, the Tribunal noted that those Regulations allow a representation to the Chief Commissioner against an order under regulation 13(1), but do not provide a further appeal against the order passed in such proceedings. It also accepted that such orders are not decisions under the Customs Act for section 129A purposes. The appeal against the Principal Chief Commissioner's order on forfeiture of security and penalty was therefore dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty to pursue any other remedy available in law.
Section 129A of the Customs Act does not create a Tribunal appeal where the underlying statute does not provide one. In the context of the Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Regulations, 2010, the Tribunal noted that those Regulations allow a representation to the Chief Commissioner against an order under regulation 13(1), but do not provide a further appeal against the order passed in such proceedings. It also accepted that such orders are not decisions under the Customs Act for section 129A purposes. The appeal against the Principal Chief Commissioner's order on forfeiture of security and penalty was therefore dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty to pursue any other remedy available in law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
