Prospective customs notification amendments cannot bar provisional release consideration for earlier imports when bills of lading predate their commen...
Personal guarantor insolvency jurisdiction follows the corporate debtor's CIRP Bench, enabling inter-territorial transfer and preventing parallel proc...
Section 47-A undervaluation threshold: fraudulent intent requirement faces reconsideration after referral to a larger Bench for authoritative resoluti...
RBI supersession powers over multi-State co-operative banks operate independently of the constitutional six-month ceiling and permit statutory extensi...
Availability of a statutory revision in baggage confiscation matters may warrant declining writ jurisdiction where alleged procedural breaches depend on disputed facts. Although an alternative remedy does not automatically preclude a writ petition alleging natural justice or jurisdictional defects, disputes over waiver of written notice, oral notice, the alleged statement and voluntariness of contemporaneous documents require factual examination in revision. The writ petition challenging confiscation of a gold bar and consequential penalty was not entertained, with merits left open for statutory revision. A revision filed within the stipulated period could not be rejected merely because the petitioner had first approached the High Court.
Availability of a statutory revision in baggage confiscation matters may warrant declining writ jurisdiction where alleged procedural breaches depend on disputed facts. Although an alternative remedy does not automatically preclude a writ petition alleging natural justice or jurisdictional defects, disputes over waiver of written notice, oral notice, the alleged statement and voluntariness of contemporaneous documents require factual examination in revision. The writ petition challenging confiscation of a gold bar and consequential penalty was not entertained, with merits left open for statutory revision. A revision filed within the stipulated period could not be rejected merely because the petitioner had first approached the High Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4884 
