Penalty under Section 112 fails where knowledge, admissible statements, and incriminating evidence are not proved against the Customs Broker's directo...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4141 to 4160 of 96509 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC rejected the rectification application, finding no procedural fault by the Respondent-Department. The Court held that the petitioner failed to provide substantive reasoning in the application. While granting time until 10th July, 2025 to file an appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act, the Court left open the issue of notification validity, subject to pending Supreme Court and High Court decisions in related matters. The petitioner was advised to pursue remedies through the appellate authority, with the final determination contingent on ongoing judicial proceedings.
HC rejected the rectification application, finding no procedural fault by the Respondent-Department. The Court held that the petitioner failed to provide substantive reasoning in the application. While granting time until 10th July, 2025 to file an appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act, the Court left open the issue of notification validity, subject to pending Supreme Court and High Court decisions in related matters. The petitioner was advised to pursue remedies through the appellate authority, with the final determination contingent on ongoing judicial proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.