Person chargeable with duty must be the importer at importation; subsequent purchasers cannot be held liable where beneficial owner rules did not appl...
Statutory limits on executive review of vested land orders are reaffirmed: conferral of Civil Court powers does not automatically grant an unrestricted review jurisdiction to executive quasi judicial officers, and statutes barring reopening of concluded vesting determinations preclude such reviews. The 2008 review purporting to set aside the 1971 vesting order was therefore without jurisdiction and void; the Tribunal's quashing of that review was properly restored. Separately, the review failed the narrow Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC tests (no newly discovered evidence shown, no mistake apparent on the record, and no analogous sufficient reason), so the 1971 vesting order remains operative.
Statutory limits on executive review of vested land orders are reaffirmed: conferral of Civil Court powers does not automatically grant an unrestricted review jurisdiction to executive quasi judicial officers, and statutes barring reopening of concluded vesting determinations preclude such reviews. The 2008 review purporting to set aside the 1971 vesting order was therefore without jurisdiction and void; the Tribunal's quashing of that review was properly restored. Separately, the review failed the narrow Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC tests (no newly discovered evidence shown, no mistake apparent on the record, and no analogous sufficient reason), so the 1971 vesting order remains operative.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
