Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
HC upheld validity of Rule 36(4) of CGST Rules, dismissing constitutional challenge. Court determined Rule 36(4) derives authority from Section 16 of CGST Act and general rule-making powers under Section 164, not from unenforced Section 43A. Since Section 43A was never notified and later omitted by Finance Act 2022, it cannot be source of Rule 36(4)'s authority. Court also declined to examine specific orders challenged by petitioner due to available statutory appeal remedy. Ruling affirms Rule 36(4)'s legitimacy in governing input tax credit eligibility procedures under GST framework.
HC upheld validity of Rule 36(4) of CGST Rules, dismissing constitutional challenge. Court determined Rule 36(4) derives authority from Section 16 of CGST Act and general rule-making powers under Section 164, not from unenforced Section 43A. Since Section 43A was never notified and later omitted by Finance Act 2022, it cannot be source of Rule 36(4)'s authority. Court also declined to examine specific orders challenged by petitioner due to available statutory appeal remedy. Ruling affirms Rule 36(4)'s legitimacy in governing input tax credit eligibility procedures under GST framework.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.