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 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that Sections 269-UN and 293 of Income Tax Act, 1961 do not bar civil court jurisdiction in the present suit. The court found no impediment to plaintiffs seeking declaration of property re-vestment, as the suit does not challenge or modify any income tax order. The single judge's earlier order was set aside, with the suit restored for expedited hearing. The court ruled against revenue authorities, determining that the statutory provisions do not prevent judicial review of the specific legal claim. No costs were awarded, and the original proceedings shall continue until final disposal.
HC held that Sections 269-UN and 293 of Income Tax Act, 1961 do not bar civil court jurisdiction in the present suit. The court found no impediment to plaintiffs seeking declaration of property re-vestment, as the suit does not challenge or modify any income tax order. The single judge's earlier order was set aside, with the suit restored for expedited hearing. The court ruled against revenue authorities, determining that the statutory provisions do not prevent judicial review of the specific legal claim. No costs were awarded, and the original proceedings shall continue until final disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.