Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 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 held that the Adjudicating Authority under the Foreign Trade (FT) Act lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim for payment of interest on an amount utilized by the petitioner, to which they were not legally entitled. The Court observed that the FT Act only allows for imposition of penalties or confiscation, but does not provide for adjudication of interest claims. The interest claim must be enforced before a competent forum. The Court restrained the respondents from putting the petitioner's Importer-Exporter Code on the Denied Entity List and directed its removal if already done. The petition was allowed.
The High Court held that the Adjudicating Authority under the Foreign Trade (FT) Act lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim for payment of interest on an amount utilized by the petitioner, to which they were not legally entitled. The Court observed that the FT Act only allows for imposition of penalties or confiscation, but does not provide for adjudication of interest claims. The interest claim must be enforced before a competent forum. The Court restrained the respondents from putting the petitioner's Importer-Exporter Code on the Denied Entity List and directed its removal if already done. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.