Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
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.