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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95673 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 quashed the show cause notices and the impugned order, holding that the adjudicating authority lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 28(4) of the Customs Act. The Court observed that there were no allegations of willful misstatement, collusion or suppression of facts by the petitioner. The respondents failed to establish any suppression of material facts before issuing the show cause notices. The petitioner had submitted all relevant documents during the inquiry, and the inability to reconcile LNG quantities in the Bills of Entry with regasified natural gas supplied through pipelines was due to technical reasons. Consequently, the extended period of limitation u/s 28(4) could not be invoked, vitiating the entire proceedings pursuant to the show cause notices.
The High Court quashed the show cause notices and the impugned order, holding that the adjudicating authority lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 28(4) of the Customs Act. The Court observed that there were no allegations of willful misstatement, collusion or suppression of facts by the petitioner. The respondents failed to establish any suppression of material facts before issuing the show cause notices. The petitioner had submitted all relevant documents during the inquiry, and the inability to reconcile LNG quantities in the Bills of Entry with regasified natural gas supplied through pipelines was due to technical reasons. Consequently, the extended period of limitation u/s 28(4) could not be invoked, vitiating the entire proceedings pursuant to the show cause notices.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
