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...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 96408 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 respondent (DRI) had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, following the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs vs. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. The petition was disposed of by restoring the notice to the Adjudicating Authority for adjudication by a proper officer u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
The High Court held that the respondent (DRI) had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, following the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs vs. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. The petition was disposed of by restoring the notice to the Adjudicating Authority for adjudication by a proper officer u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.