Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Penalty under Section 112(a)(i) could not be sustained where tea was imported bona fide for processing and re-export, supported by health and phytosanitary certificates, and there was no misdeclaration in quantity or description. The viable seeds were detected only on testing by Plant Quarantine authorities, and the Tribunal found no wilful intent or mens rea to import prohibited goods. On that basis, the penalty was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Penalty under Section 112(a)(i) could not be sustained where tea was imported bona fide for processing and re-export, supported by health and phytosanitary certificates, and there was no misdeclaration in quantity or description. The viable seeds were detected only on testing by Plant Quarantine authorities, and the Tribunal found no wilful intent or mens rea to import prohibited goods. On that basis, the penalty was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.