Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Petition dismissed for want of locus to challenge detention and confiscation proceedings where High Court found insufficient nexus between petitioner and intercepted consignment; E-way bill showed different dispatch and consignee locations, registration and documentation discrepancies, and neither supplier nor recipient sought release, leading the Court to conclude lack of standing. Court also refused to quash the show cause notice under Section 130, treating interference as premature in view of precedent and noting indicia of tax evasion and deceptive documentation on the record.
Petition dismissed for want of locus to challenge detention and confiscation proceedings where High Court found insufficient nexus between petitioner and intercepted consignment; E-way bill showed different dispatch and consignee locations, registration and documentation discrepancies, and neither supplier nor recipient sought release, leading the Court to conclude lack of standing. Court also refused to quash the show cause notice under Section 130, treating interference as premature in view of precedent and noting indicia of tax evasion and deceptive documentation on the record.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.