Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95916 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 130 of the Customs Act is described as establishing a self-contained, two-stage appellate process. At the pre-admission stage, the High Court conducts an ex parte screening limited to whether the memorandum discloses a substantial question of law; respondents cannot intervene then to contest maintainability, jurisdiction, or the applicable rate-of-duty notification. Those objections are deferred to the post-admission hearing under Section 130(5), where respondents may argue that the framed questions do not arise or are legally barred. High Court Rules cannot override the statutory sequence, and provisions concerning procedural defects do not permit a merits-based threshold challenge. The preliminary objection was rejected and the appeal was directed to proceed ex parte on admission.
Section 130 of the Customs Act is described as establishing a self-contained, two-stage appellate process. At the pre-admission stage, the High Court conducts an ex parte screening limited to whether the memorandum discloses a substantial question of law; respondents cannot intervene then to contest maintainability, jurisdiction, or the applicable rate-of-duty notification. Those objections are deferred to the post-admission hearing under Section 130(5), where respondents may argue that the framed questions do not arise or are legally barred. High Court Rules cannot override the statutory sequence, and provisions concerning procedural defects do not permit a merits-based threshold challenge. The preliminary objection was rejected and the appeal was directed to proceed ex parte on admission.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.