CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Clause (f) of the 28 July 2017 circular does not create an automatic right to a third re-test of seized shawls. Where the first test and re-test are already on record and differ, the competent adjudicating authority may rely on either report by recording reasons, and may order a further re-test only if it cannot decide on the existing material; such discretion is not available in every case. A writ petition cannot compel a third test before adjudication has reached that stage, especially where the request is made belatedly and appears dilatory. The challenge to the show cause notice and refusal of re-testing was therefore rejected, with liberty to the authority to consider a third test during adjudication if warranted.
Clause (f) of the 28 July 2017 circular does not create an automatic right to a third re-test of seized shawls. Where the first test and re-test are already on record and differ, the competent adjudicating authority may rely on either report by recording reasons, and may order a further re-test only if it cannot decide on the existing material; such discretion is not available in every case. A writ petition cannot compel a third test before adjudication has reached that stage, especially where the request is made belatedly and appears dilatory. The challenge to the show cause notice and refusal of re-testing was therefore rejected, with liberty to the authority to consider a third test during adjudication if warranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.