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...
International cargo transhipment through Indian ports continues with Customs-controlled storage, re-export safeguards, and coordinated multi-station m...
Pre-existing disputes over performance, delay, quality and termination of work orders defeated admission under Section 9, because repeated correspondence before the demand notice showed a real controversy that could not be resolved in insolvency proceedings. The Tribunal held that the workmanlike completion obligation was missed, the defects were disputed, and the resulting liability involved contested facts unsuitable for summary determination. It further held that even if the contract had been frustrated or breached due to lack of permission, the remedy would be a claim for unliquidated damages triable by a civil court, not an operational debt enforceable in insolvency. The dismissal of the Section 9 application was therefore sustained.
Pre-existing disputes over performance, delay, quality and termination of work orders defeated admission under Section 9, because repeated correspondence before the demand notice showed a real controversy that could not be resolved in insolvency proceedings. The Tribunal held that the workmanlike completion obligation was missed, the defects were disputed, and the resulting liability involved contested facts unsuitable for summary determination. It further held that even if the contract had been frustrated or breached due to lack of permission, the remedy would be a claim for unliquidated damages triable by a civil court, not an operational debt enforceable in insolvency. The dismissal of the Section 9 application was therefore sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
