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 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 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" ?
This case deals with the levy of deficit stamp duty and penalty in a court-conducted auction sale. The key points are: In a court-supervised auction sale, the stamp authorities cannot determine the true market value of the property sold and levy stamp duty based on that valuation. Once the bid is accepted by the court-appointed committee and the sale is confirmed at the bid price, which is above the reserve price, that price is considered the market value. The Supreme Court has conclusively held that in a court auction, the registering authority cannot question the market price determined by the court's sale process, as it would amount to sitting in appeal over the court's decision. The transparent court auction process is considered one of the best methods to determine market value. The High Court allowed the petition based on the Supreme Court's ruling in ASL Vyapar Pvt Ltd and its own decision in Spectrum Constructions.
This case deals with the levy of deficit stamp duty and penalty in a court-conducted auction sale. The key points are: In a court-supervised auction sale, the stamp authorities cannot determine the true market value of the property sold and levy stamp duty based on that valuation. Once the bid is accepted by the court-appointed committee and the sale is confirmed at the bid price, which is above the reserve price, that price is considered the market value. The Supreme Court has conclusively held that in a court auction, the registering authority cannot question the market price determined by the court's sale process, as it would amount to sitting in appeal over the court's decision. The transparent court auction process is considered one of the best methods to determine market value. The High Court allowed the petition based on the Supreme Court's ruling in ASL Vyapar Pvt Ltd and its own decision in Spectrum Constructions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.