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...
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...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Seeking rectification of an alleged mistake - question of jurisdiction of this tribunal - error apparent on the face of record or not - The Tribunal rejected the appellant's claim, stating that it had considered the jurisdiction issue in light of previous judgments and amendments. Since both parties chose not to argue the jurisdiction issue during the hearing, the Tribunal proceeded to decide the case on its merits. - The Tribunal emphasized that when a counsel makes submissions, it is presumed to be on the instructions of the appellant. Hiring a new counsel post-judgment to raise new grounds or find fault with the previous counsel's submissions is not a valid approach.
Seeking rectification of an alleged mistake - question of jurisdiction of this tribunal - error apparent on the face of record or not - The Tribunal rejected the appellant's claim, stating that it had considered the jurisdiction issue in light of previous judgments and amendments. Since both parties chose not to argue the jurisdiction issue during the hearing, the Tribunal proceeded to decide the case on its merits. - The Tribunal emphasized that when a counsel makes submissions, it is presumed to be on the instructions of the appellant. Hiring a new counsel post-judgment to raise new grounds or find fault with the previous counsel's submissions is not a valid approach.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.