Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Non-compliance with the remand order of the Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation - import of rough marble blocks - The Tribunal noted the appellant's submission regarding the communication of license applications to the authorities. It criticized the adjudicating authority for disregarding the altered factual situation highlighted in the remand order and for insisting on restoring the previously discarded order. The Tribunal deemed this defiance of appellate directions as invalidating the impugned order. - The Tribunal emphasized the authority of the DGFT in administering trade policy and issuing import licenses. It clarified that the date of issue of the license was not material to quantitative restrictions, and the relevance lay in its coverage of the impugned goods. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Non-compliance with the remand order of the Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation - import of rough marble blocks - The Tribunal noted the appellant's submission regarding the communication of license applications to the authorities. It criticized the adjudicating authority for disregarding the altered factual situation highlighted in the remand order and for insisting on restoring the previously discarded order. The Tribunal deemed this defiance of appellate directions as invalidating the impugned order. - The Tribunal emphasized the authority of the DGFT in administering trade policy and issuing import licenses. It clarified that the date of issue of the license was not material to quantitative restrictions, and the relevance lay in its coverage of the impugned goods. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.