Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
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.