Income Disclosure Scheme immunity and search-material requirements barred further share-transaction additions in unabated assessments under section 15...
Toy balloon tariff classification: functional heading prevails over residual rubber and festive article headings, supporting penalties for deliberate ...
Customs valuation using comparable contemporaneous imports can displace declared value, while missing speaking orders require pursuit before competent...
Foreign customs declarations and importer admissions established undervaluation, supporting sequential value redetermination, differential duty, and m...
The writ petition challenging notices u/ss 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, including alleged arbitrary action for non-compliance with a letter of arrangement dated June 28, 2021, was filed after issuance of the Section 13(4) notice. The Supreme Court in Phoenix ARC held that writ petitions against proposed action u/s 13(4) are an abuse of process due to the efficacious statutory remedy of appeal u/s 17. The Supreme Court in Baghora Polylab held that a contract may be discharged by parties entering into a new contract or accepting modified obligations. Here, the respondent executed documents per the November 11, 2021 letter of arrangement, constituting a new contract substituting the original June 28, 2021 restructuring letter. Thus, the cause of action for specific performance of the June 28 letter no longer survives after accepting the November 11 letter. The High Court's direction to give effect to the June 28 letter was set aside.
The writ petition challenging notices u/ss 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, including alleged arbitrary action for non-compliance with a letter of arrangement dated June 28, 2021, was filed after issuance of the Section 13(4) notice. The Supreme Court in Phoenix ARC held that writ petitions against proposed action u/s 13(4) are an abuse of process due to the efficacious statutory remedy of appeal u/s 17. The Supreme Court in Baghora Polylab held that a contract may be discharged by parties entering into a new contract or accepting modified obligations. Here, the respondent executed documents per the November 11, 2021 letter of arrangement, constituting a new contract substituting the original June 28, 2021 restructuring letter. Thus, the cause of action for specific performance of the June 28 letter no longer survives after accepting the November 11 letter. The High Court's direction to give effect to the June 28 letter was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
