Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Advance Authorisation Scheme - Non-fulfilment of Export Obligation - fraudulent activities - allegation of collusion with the Customs officials - The CESTAT examined the allegations against the appellant and the findings of the adjudicating authority. It noted that while the adjudicating authority implicated the appellant in fraudulent activities, there was a lack of concrete evidence supporting these allegations. Furthermore, the court observed that the involvement of customs officers, mentioned in the proceedings, was not substantiated with adequate details or evidence. Consequently, the court found that the penalties imposed on the appellant lacked a legal basis.
Advance Authorisation Scheme - Non-fulfilment of Export Obligation - fraudulent activities - allegation of collusion with the Customs officials - The CESTAT examined the allegations against the appellant and the findings of the adjudicating authority. It noted that while the adjudicating authority implicated the appellant in fraudulent activities, there was a lack of concrete evidence supporting these allegations. Furthermore, the court observed that the involvement of customs officers, mentioned in the proceedings, was not substantiated with adequate details or evidence. Consequently, the court found that the penalties imposed on the appellant lacked a legal basis.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
