Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95714 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court considered a challenge to letters issued by the Deputy Commissioner under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme due to the Petitioner's failure to make payment as per the SVLDRS-3 form. The Court found that the Petitioner's inability to make payment was due to a technical glitch, which was raised with the Respondents. The Petitioner expressed willingness to pay, and as no fault was attributed to them, they should not be denied the SVLDRS benefit. The Court referenced a previous decision where a similar situation allowed the declarant to make payment and benefit from the SVLDR scheme. The application was disposed of in favor of the Petitioner.
The High Court considered a challenge to letters issued by the Deputy Commissioner under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme due to the Petitioner's failure to make payment as per the SVLDRS-3 form. The Court found that the Petitioner's inability to make payment was due to a technical glitch, which was raised with the Respondents. The Petitioner expressed willingness to pay, and as no fault was attributed to them, they should not be denied the SVLDRS benefit. The Court referenced a previous decision where a similar situation allowed the declarant to make payment and benefit from the SVLDR scheme. The application was disposed of in favor of the Petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
