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...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95714 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC dismissed the writ challenge and disposed of the petition, holding that writ jurisdiction is inappropriate where multiple impugned adjudication orders involve numerous noticees and differing factual matrices requiring detailed factual inquiry. The HC held that the proper officer cannot be fixed based solely on the Petitioner's position and that the Petitioner's contentions may be ventilated in statutory appeals under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The Petitioner was granted leave to file six separate appeals against the impugned orders, subject to a pre-deposit requirement limited to the order dated 28 January 2025 (total demand Rs. 15,90,84,564; tax Rs. 7,95,42,282). Appeals and pre-deposit to be filed by 30 September 2025.
HC dismissed the writ challenge and disposed of the petition, holding that writ jurisdiction is inappropriate where multiple impugned adjudication orders involve numerous noticees and differing factual matrices requiring detailed factual inquiry. The HC held that the proper officer cannot be fixed based solely on the Petitioner's position and that the Petitioner's contentions may be ventilated in statutory appeals under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The Petitioner was granted leave to file six separate appeals against the impugned orders, subject to a pre-deposit requirement limited to the order dated 28 January 2025 (total demand Rs. 15,90,84,564; tax Rs. 7,95,42,282). Appeals and pre-deposit to be filed by 30 September 2025.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.