Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Contempt application preferred by the appellant alleging non-compliance of order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court - entitlement to refund of the excess payment made by the petitioner - The Supreme Court held that, the learned Single Judge was not justified in discharging the respondents in the contempt case without ensuring payment of the refund amount with interest to the appellant herein. - The Court grants relief to the appellant, directing the respondents to refund the excess amount paid with interest at the rate of 12% per annum for specified periods, and imposes a deadline for compliance with the order.
Contempt application preferred by the appellant alleging non-compliance of order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court - entitlement to refund of the excess payment made by the petitioner - The Supreme Court held that, the learned Single Judge was not justified in discharging the respondents in the contempt case without ensuring payment of the refund amount with interest to the appellant herein. - The Court grants relief to the appellant, directing the respondents to refund the excess amount paid with interest at the rate of 12% per annum for specified periods, and imposes a deadline for compliance with the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.