Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Non-injurious price in anti-dumping proceedings had to be disclosed with sufficient factual detail before final findings, because the calculation directly affected normal value, injury margin and the recommendation of nil duty. The Tribunal found that the disclosure statement did not explain the methodology or basis of the working, so the exporter could not effectively respond; disclosure after final findings caused prejudice and the nil-duty recommendation was set aside and remitted for fresh determination with reasonable opportunity. On product scope, semi-finished ophthalmic lenses with refractive index above 1.6 were upheld as excluded from the product under consideration because the domestic industry did not actually produce that category and the items were not technically or commercially substitutable.
Non-injurious price in anti-dumping proceedings had to be disclosed with sufficient factual detail before final findings, because the calculation directly affected normal value, injury margin and the recommendation of nil duty. The Tribunal found that the disclosure statement did not explain the methodology or basis of the working, so the exporter could not effectively respond; disclosure after final findings caused prejudice and the nil-duty recommendation was set aside and remitted for fresh determination with reasonable opportunity. On product scope, semi-finished ophthalmic lenses with refractive index above 1.6 were upheld as excluded from the product under consideration because the domestic industry did not actually produce that category and the items were not technically or commercially substitutable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
