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...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Petitioner failed to submit original shipping bills to substantiate claimed exports, providing only photocopies which were not accepted for meeting export obligation. Two shipping bills fell outside extended export obligation period, two were Drawback Shipping Bills with rejected conversion requests. Petitioner claimed loss of Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate Book but provided unsatisfactory explanation before Appellate and Reviewing Authorities. Petitioner did not submit required documents to demonstrate compliance with export obligation and failed to appear for personal hearings despite opportunities. Petitioner did not provide written response to objections raised. Petitioner failed to prove Customs Authority's agreement to convert Drawback Shipping Bills to DEEC Shipping Bills and did not submit documents proving export obligation fulfilment or pay prescribed customs duty. Orders rejecting review petition found reasonable based on facts, not arbitrary. High Court dismissed petition, finding no grounds for interference under Article 226 of Constitution of India, 1950.
Petitioner failed to submit original shipping bills to substantiate claimed exports, providing only photocopies which were not accepted for meeting export obligation. Two shipping bills fell outside extended export obligation period, two were Drawback Shipping Bills with rejected conversion requests. Petitioner claimed loss of Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate Book but provided unsatisfactory explanation before Appellate and Reviewing Authorities. Petitioner did not submit required documents to demonstrate compliance with export obligation and failed to appear for personal hearings despite opportunities. Petitioner did not provide written response to objections raised. Petitioner failed to prove Customs Authority's agreement to convert Drawback Shipping Bills to DEEC Shipping Bills and did not submit documents proving export obligation fulfilment or pay prescribed customs duty. Orders rejecting review petition found reasonable based on facts, not arbitrary. High Court dismissed petition, finding no grounds for interference under Article 226 of Constitution of India, 1950.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
