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...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Revocation of Licenced Customs Broker Licence - The Commissioner alleged violations of various provisions of the CBLR, particularly related to bribery. However, the appellant contested these allegations, arguing that the amounts in question were for legitimate expenses, not bribes, and that they cannot be held responsible for the actions of their employees without evidence of authorization. The Tribunal found that the allegations were based on preliminary findings and lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate them. Therefore, it set aside the Commissioner's order, ruling that the proceedings were premature and unsubstantiated. - Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order.
Revocation of Licenced Customs Broker Licence - The Commissioner alleged violations of various provisions of the CBLR, particularly related to bribery. However, the appellant contested these allegations, arguing that the amounts in question were for legitimate expenses, not bribes, and that they cannot be held responsible for the actions of their employees without evidence of authorization. The Tribunal found that the allegations were based on preliminary findings and lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate them. Therefore, it set aside the Commissioner's order, ruling that the proceedings were premature and unsubstantiated. - Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.