Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Two conflicting orders-in-original were issued by the same authority for the same shipment and duty drawback claim, reflecting total non-application of mind and legal infirmity. Once the earlier order-in-original was found unsustainable, the later order-in-original could not independently survive and was liable to be treated as a nullity because two inconsistent adjudications cannot coexist on the same claim. Accordingly, both orders-in-original and consequential communications/notices were quashed, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on merits under the Customs Act, after following due procedure and principles of natural justice, within a fixed timeframe. - HC
Two conflicting orders-in-original were issued by the same authority for the same shipment and duty drawback claim, reflecting total non-application of mind and legal infirmity. Once the earlier order-in-original was found unsustainable, the later order-in-original could not independently survive and was liable to be treated as a nullity because two inconsistent adjudications cannot coexist on the same claim. Accordingly, both orders-in-original and consequential communications/notices were quashed, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on merits under the Customs Act, after following due procedure and principles of natural justice, within a fixed timeframe. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
