Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The HC held that the respondent authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the impugned show-cause notice (SCN) by invoking the extended limitation period under Section 28(1) of the Act, as there was no allegation of collusion, willful mis-statement, or suppression of facts. On merits, the petitioners, who purchased DEPB Licences from the open market for import without duty payment, were found not liable for the demand below the threshold limit. Subsequent developments and the pendency of related proceedings further undermined the SCN's validity. Consequently, the HC quashed and set aside the SCN dated 27.8.2002 against the petitioners, allowing the appeal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
