Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The central issue was whether the approval authorizing a special audit under s.142(2A) complied with Circular No.19/2019 by bearing a DIN and requisite manual-issuance justification; the court held the approval dated 06.02.2025 lacked a DIN and any exceptional-circumstances endorsement, violating the Circular and settled precedent that jurisdictional communications (including approvals/sanctions) must carry a DIN. Legal basis: Circular No.19/2019 and prior HC rulings invalidating DIN-less sanctions. Outcome: the approval is non est in law and the subsequent order directing a special audit is without jurisdiction - decided for the assessee. - HC
The central issue was whether the approval authorizing a special audit under s.142(2A) complied with Circular No.19/2019 by bearing a DIN and requisite manual-issuance justification; the court held the approval dated 06.02.2025 lacked a DIN and any exceptional-circumstances endorsement, violating the Circular and settled precedent that jurisdictional communications (including approvals/sanctions) must carry a DIN. Legal basis: Circular No.19/2019 and prior HC rulings invalidating DIN-less sanctions. Outcome: the approval is non est in law and the subsequent order directing a special audit is without jurisdiction - decided for the assessee. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
