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 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 96136 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Seeking refund of amount deposited - department coerced to deposit the tax amounts - The High court found the petitioner's claim of coercion unsubstantiated, highlighting evidence of voluntary payment and the petitioner's failure to raise complaints regarding coercion. The court emphasized that determining coercion versus voluntary payment involves disputed factual questions beyond the scope of writ proceedings. It asserted that such determinations require extensive evidence analysis, akin to civil suits, which cannot be conducted in summary proceedings under Article 226.
Seeking refund of amount deposited - department coerced to deposit the tax amounts - The High court found the petitioner's claim of coercion unsubstantiated, highlighting evidence of voluntary payment and the petitioner's failure to raise complaints regarding coercion. The court emphasized that determining coercion versus voluntary payment involves disputed factual questions beyond the scope of writ proceedings. It asserted that such determinations require extensive evidence analysis, akin to civil suits, which cannot be conducted in summary proceedings under Article 226.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.