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...
Under FEMA, pre-deposit of penalty is the rule and waiver is an exception available only on proof of undue hardship, with protective conditions for recovery. The Tribunal had already exercised that discretion by granting substantial relief, and the High Court found no clear prima facie case for total waiver, as the petitioners' own case showed awareness that the remittances attracted FEMA. It also held that no perversity, unreasonableness or non-application of mind was shown in the hardship assessment, and that supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot be used to reappreciate the Tribunal's discretion. The Tribunal's order was therefore upheld in principle, with only the immediate cash pre-deposit reduced to 5% and the balance to be secured by bank guarantee or surety.
Under FEMA, pre-deposit of penalty is the rule and waiver is an exception available only on proof of undue hardship, with protective conditions for recovery. The Tribunal had already exercised that discretion by granting substantial relief, and the High Court found no clear prima facie case for total waiver, as the petitioners' own case showed awareness that the remittances attracted FEMA. It also held that no perversity, unreasonableness or non-application of mind was shown in the hardship assessment, and that supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot be used to reappreciate the Tribunal's discretion. The Tribunal's order was therefore upheld in principle, with only the immediate cash pre-deposit reduced to 5% and the balance to be secured by bank guarantee or surety.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
