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...
Eligibility of the petitioner to make a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2015 (SVLDRS) and the appropriation of the amount quantified in the audit report from the eligible refund claimed by the petitioner. The court held that the petitioner was ineligible to make a declaration under SVLDRS as the audit was initiated before 30.06.2019, and the amount of duty involved was not quantified on or before that date, as per Section 125(1)(e) of the Scheme. Regarding the appropriation of the refund, the court ruled that the respondent authority was not justified in adjusting the outstanding dues quantified in the audit report from the refund claim without issuing a show-cause notice or providing an opportunity for hearing, as required u/s 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. Consequently, the court quashed the orders and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after issuing a show-cause notice and providing an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner regarding the refund claim.
Eligibility of the petitioner to make a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2015 (SVLDRS) and the appropriation of the amount quantified in the audit report from the eligible refund claimed by the petitioner. The court held that the petitioner was ineligible to make a declaration under SVLDRS as the audit was initiated before 30.06.2019, and the amount of duty involved was not quantified on or before that date, as per Section 125(1)(e) of the Scheme. Regarding the appropriation of the refund, the court ruled that the respondent authority was not justified in adjusting the outstanding dues quantified in the audit report from the refund claim without issuing a show-cause notice or providing an opportunity for hearing, as required u/s 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. Consequently, the court quashed the orders and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after issuing a show-cause notice and providing an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner regarding the refund claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.