Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Self-assessed Bills of Entry attain finality unless challenged within the statutory appellate period. The Tribunal held that reassessment under Section 17(5) applies only where departmental verification, examination, testing or similar scrutiny shows the self-assessment to be incorrect; a later allegation of short shipment, raised about two years after clearance, could not reopen a concluded assessment. It further held that refund proceedings cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or as a fresh assessment on merits. Because the importer did not timely challenge the assessment, and any belated challenge was beyond the condonable period, both reassessment and refund were rightly rejected.
Self-assessed Bills of Entry attain finality unless challenged within the statutory appellate period. The Tribunal held that reassessment under Section 17(5) applies only where departmental verification, examination, testing or similar scrutiny shows the self-assessment to be incorrect; a later allegation of short shipment, raised about two years after clearance, could not reopen a concluded assessment. It further held that refund proceedings cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or as a fresh assessment on merits. Because the importer did not timely challenge the assessment, and any belated challenge was beyond the condonable period, both reassessment and refund were rightly rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.