Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
The dominant issue was whether the recall application should be allowed on the ground that no notice was served and no effective opportunity to file a counter was granted. The tribunal held that the purpose of notice is to impart knowledge and enable contest; where a party has actual knowledge and participates through its representative, the mode of service becomes immaterial. Since the record showed repeated participation and multiple opportunities to file a counter, which were not availed until the right was closed, the plea of lack of opportunity was rejected. Consequently, the recall rejection was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether the recall application should be allowed on the ground that no notice was served and no effective opportunity to file a counter was granted. The tribunal held that the purpose of notice is to impart knowledge and enable contest; where a party has actual knowledge and participates through its representative, the mode of service becomes immaterial. Since the record showed repeated participation and multiple opportunities to file a counter, which were not availed until the right was closed, the plea of lack of opportunity was rejected. Consequently, the recall rejection was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.