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...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 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 quashed Orders-In-Original issued after an 11-year delay in adjudicating a Show Cause Notice, holding that inordinate delay constituted sufficient ground for quashing proceedings. The court rejected respondents' justifications based on CGST implementation, COVID-19, and alleged delays by petitioners. Relying on Vos Technologies India precedent, the court emphasized that authorities are obligated to conclude adjudication expeditiously, and that matters with financial or penal consequences cannot remain unresolved for years. The statutory flexibility cannot be construed as sanctioning indolence or used routinely without justification. The HC ordered release of bank guarantees furnished by petitioners.
The HC quashed Orders-In-Original issued after an 11-year delay in adjudicating a Show Cause Notice, holding that inordinate delay constituted sufficient ground for quashing proceedings. The court rejected respondents' justifications based on CGST implementation, COVID-19, and alleged delays by petitioners. Relying on Vos Technologies India precedent, the court emphasized that authorities are obligated to conclude adjudication expeditiously, and that matters with financial or penal consequences cannot remain unresolved for years. The statutory flexibility cannot be construed as sanctioning indolence or used routinely without justification. The HC ordered release of bank guarantees furnished by petitioners.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
