Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The SC held that the respondent's Section 34 application under the ACA, filed on 11.07.2022 (the next court working day), was within the limitation period and required no condonation of delay. The High Court correctly allowed the Section 37 appeal, determining the application was timely filed. The Court declined to interfere with the High Court's interim direction staying execution of pending recovery until merits adjudication, noting the appellant had already withdrawn 50% of the arbitral sum deposited by the respondent. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
The SC held that the respondent's Section 34 application under the ACA, filed on 11.07.2022 (the next court working day), was within the limitation period and required no condonation of delay. The High Court correctly allowed the Section 37 appeal, determining the application was timely filed. The Court declined to interfere with the High Court's interim direction staying execution of pending recovery until merits adjudication, noting the appellant had already withdrawn 50% of the arbitral sum deposited by the respondent. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.