Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Delayed adjudication under s. 28(9) of the Customs Act was challenged on the ground that the extension order for deciding the SCN was not communicated, in a dispute over denial of preferential duty exemption based on Certificates of Origin under the ASEAN-India FTA. The Court held that, unlike s. 110(2), s. 28 does not mandate prior intimation or communication of an extension; while intimation is desirable, non-communication is not fatal. Given the failure to file any substantive reply on merits to rebut the verification email questioning the Certificates of Origin, no ground for writ interference was made out; the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal with time to file it. - HC
Delayed adjudication under s. 28(9) of the Customs Act was challenged on the ground that the extension order for deciding the SCN was not communicated, in a dispute over denial of preferential duty exemption based on Certificates of Origin under the ASEAN-India FTA. The Court held that, unlike s. 110(2), s. 28 does not mandate prior intimation or communication of an extension; while intimation is desirable, non-communication is not fatal. Given the failure to file any substantive reply on merits to rebut the verification email questioning the Certificates of Origin, no ground for writ interference was made out; the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal with time to file it. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
