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...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Special Additional Duty refund limitation under an amending customs exemption notification is addressed in relation to a claim rejected solely for filing beyond one year. The limitation was treated as requiring read-down because subordinate legislation could not impose a time bar affecting substantive refund rights without applying a statutory limitation under the parent enactment. A contrary High Court view was noted, but the refund claim was treated as covered by the decisions supporting read-down. The time-bar rejection was set aside, with consequential relief in accordance with law.
Special Additional Duty refund limitation under an amending customs exemption notification is addressed in relation to a claim rejected solely for filing beyond one year. The limitation was treated as requiring read-down because subordinate legislation could not impose a time bar affecting substantive refund rights without applying a statutory limitation under the parent enactment. A contrary High Court view was noted, but the refund claim was treated as covered by the decisions supporting read-down. The time-bar rejection was set aside, with consequential relief in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.