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...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC set aside the impugned penalty order against the petitioner, an Executive Director in a public limited company, finding no merit in the respondents' contentions. The orders failed to establish the petitioner's personal liability for the company's defaults under the FTDR Act regarding non-fulfilment of export obligations. The HC held that the show-cause notice and OIO did not provide reasoning for fastening liability on the petitioner, violating principles of natural justice. The petitioner's involvement was limited to signing a power-of-attorney on behalf of the company pursuant to a board resolution.
The HC set aside the impugned penalty order against the petitioner, an Executive Director in a public limited company, finding no merit in the respondents' contentions. The orders failed to establish the petitioner's personal liability for the company's defaults under the FTDR Act regarding non-fulfilment of export obligations. The HC held that the show-cause notice and OIO did not provide reasoning for fastening liability on the petitioner, violating principles of natural justice. The petitioner's involvement was limited to signing a power-of-attorney on behalf of the company pursuant to a board resolution.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
