Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
Departmental monetary thresholds under the National Litigation Policy apply to each appeal separately; the term "case" is to be read as each appeal being an individual case, so values of distinct appeals arising from a composite tribunal order cannot be aggregated to meet the filing limit. The High Court applied the departmental instruction and held that only one appeal (C.E.A.No.18 of 2025) met the prescribed monetary limit; the remaining departmental appeals were held not maintainable and dismissed for failure to satisfy the threshold.
Departmental monetary thresholds under the National Litigation Policy apply to each appeal separately; the term "case" is to be read as each appeal being an individual case, so values of distinct appeals arising from a composite tribunal order cannot be aggregated to meet the filing limit. The High Court applied the departmental instruction and held that only one appeal (C.E.A.No.18 of 2025) met the prescribed monetary limit; the remaining departmental appeals were held not maintainable and dismissed for failure to satisfy the threshold.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
