Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Approved resolution plans extinguish unsubmitted pre-approval tax claims, preventing later recovery outside the insolvency process and preserving a cl...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1241 to 1260 of 96363 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that a post-import obligation under an exemption notification may continue after rescission, and Section 159A can preserve action despite withdrawal or modification of the notification, but only within the statutory limitation period. Proceedings for confiscation, fine in lieu of confiscation, and penalty remained subject to Section 28 limitation. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond five years from the relevant date, the penal proceedings were time-barred and could not be sustained. The court distinguished the cited precedent on the ground that the notice there had been issued within time.
The HC held that a post-import obligation under an exemption notification may continue after rescission, and Section 159A can preserve action despite withdrawal or modification of the notification, but only within the statutory limitation period. Proceedings for confiscation, fine in lieu of confiscation, and penalty remained subject to Section 28 limitation. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond five years from the relevant date, the penal proceedings were time-barred and could not be sustained. The court distinguished the cited precedent on the ground that the notice there had been issued within time.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.