Person chargeable with duty must be the importer at importation; subsequent purchasers cannot be held liable where beneficial owner rules did not appl...
Section 7 insolvency proceedings were held to be within limitation because the corporate debtor's liability was repeatedly acknowledged in balance sheets, one-time settlement proposals and an email communication, attracting Section 18 of the Limitation Act and extending time. The Tribunal also applied the principle that a recovery certificate can constitute a fresh cause of action for initiating insolvency proceedings, so the application could not be treated as time-barred. On substitution, it ruled that the deceased appellant's legal heir could continue the pending appeal, since substitution had already been permitted and the heir merely stepped into the appellant's shoes to preserve the existing proceedings. The limitation objection and the maintainability challenge were rejected.
Section 7 insolvency proceedings were held to be within limitation because the corporate debtor's liability was repeatedly acknowledged in balance sheets, one-time settlement proposals and an email communication, attracting Section 18 of the Limitation Act and extending time. The Tribunal also applied the principle that a recovery certificate can constitute a fresh cause of action for initiating insolvency proceedings, so the application could not be treated as time-barred. On substitution, it ruled that the deceased appellant's legal heir could continue the pending appeal, since substitution had already been permitted and the heir merely stepped into the appellant's shoes to preserve the existing proceedings. The limitation objection and the maintainability challenge were rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
