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...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The AT rejected the Appellant's review application challenging the reopening of the mutual fund scheme following IL & FS group default. The tribunal found that SEBI, as the regulatory body, had thoroughly examined the matter and confirmed the scheme's reopening was procedurally sound, with necessary approvals and disclosures ensuring investor protection. The tribunal noted the reopening occurred in January 2021, new investors were admitted, and the NAV increased. The tribunal determined that the creation of a segregated portfolio was discretionary for the Asset Management Company, and proceeds would be distributed proportionately among existing investors. Consequently, no grounds were found to set aside the original order.
The AT rejected the Appellant's review application challenging the reopening of the mutual fund scheme following IL & FS group default. The tribunal found that SEBI, as the regulatory body, had thoroughly examined the matter and confirmed the scheme's reopening was procedurally sound, with necessary approvals and disclosures ensuring investor protection. The tribunal noted the reopening occurred in January 2021, new investors were admitted, and the NAV increased. The tribunal determined that the creation of a segregated portfolio was discretionary for the Asset Management Company, and proceeds would be distributed proportionately among existing investors. Consequently, no grounds were found to set aside the original order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
