Renewal of appointment as Custodian and Customs Cargo Service Provider covers custody and handling of imported liquid cargo at Additional Liquid Cargo Berths LB-03 and LB-04 until delivery through approved pipelines to authorised tank farms. The appointments require continuous compliance with customs and cargo-handling requirements, valid insurance, security arrangements and statutory permissions. Approval remains limited to the specified cargo and berths, does not authorise new pipelines, tank farms or altered handling arrangements without prior permission, and is subject to review and continuation of the valid operational concession.

State GST service-rate revisions apply concessional 2.5% treatment to containerised rail transport and non-air multimodal transport only where specified input tax credit restrictions are met; a 9% alternative applies in stated cases. Multimodal operators may take credit for transport-input services only within the 2.5% cap where the supplier charged a higher rate, and both multimodal alternatives are limited to domestic goods transportation. Renting of goods carriages with fuel included follows a comparable concessional-rate and limited-credit structure.

Rule 281A requires an assessee claiming Schedule IV exemption for interest and capital gains from Government securities to furnish Form No. 173A. The form requires identification, residence, tax-year, contact, and specified tax or registration details, with certain details optional for the Bank for International Settlements. For each security, the claimant must report the ISIN, security type, tenor, opening and closing values, purchases, sale consideration, gross interest, and capital gains. A principal officer must certify the information.

Section 400 specification removes deduction of tax at source from qualifying interest payments made by the New Development Bank to resident or Foreign Institutional Investor holders of Maharajah INR Bonds issued during tax year 2026-27 and subsequent tax years. The Bank must furnish required information under the specified reporting schedule and the Income-tax Rules, 2026. The withholding exclusion takes effect upon publication in the Official Gazette.

Time limit for furnishing FORM GSTR-5 by a non-resident taxable person for December 2024 is extended until 15 January 2025. The extension concerns the return required under section 39(5) and rule 63, is exercised under section 39(6) read with section 168 on the Council's recommendations, and is deemed effective from 10 January 2025.

GST confiscation procedure requires a real and reasonable hearing. Where Form GST MOV-10 allows seven days to reply, an authority cannot issue Form GST MOV-11 on the service date and rely on the absence of an immediate objection. Missing invoice or e-way bill for onward supply may warrant inquiry but does not remove statutory hearing protections. Later issuance of Form GST DRC-07 does not cure a prematurely made confiscation decision. Payment through Form GST DRC-03 to release detained goods and vehicle does not itself constitute admission, acquiescence, or waiver of the right to contest.

GST adjudication must apply the same statutory framework to officials and taxpayers, with lawful and reasoned orders. Sale of land is treated under Schedule III, subject to the stated building-sale qualification, as neither a supply of goods nor services; GST deduction from land-acquisition compensation by characterising it as a works contract service is criticised as contrary to that scheme. Proposed safeguards include personal hearings, reasonable adjournments, demand limits tied to the SCN, and effective notice where no portal response is filed.

Limitation for an appeal under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, commences upon pronouncement of the appellate order, not upon actual receipt of its certified copy. Section 12(2) permits exclusion of the day of pronouncement and the time genuinely required to obtain the copy, but not delay before applying for it or after receipt. The normal period is 45 days, with a further 15 days condonable only on sufficient cause; the maximum period cannot be enlarged.

GST challenges should, on the approach advanced, follow the statutory appellate hierarchy. An Order-in-Original should be challenged before the first appellate authority, and an Order-in-Appeal should be challenged through a second appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal. Writ recourse before the jurisdictional High Court is proposed only after Tribunal adjudication where strong legal grounds remain. Pending GST writ petitions are proposed for transfer to the jurisdictional Tribunal, reflecting its specialised GST jurisdiction and capacity for reasoned appellate review.

Admission of cheque execution triggers presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, rebuttable only through a consistent probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities. Inconsistent claims that a cheque was lost or stolen do not meet that standard. A dishonour marked "refer to drawer" may support cheque-dishonour liability, and crediting the cheque to an account connected with the payee's business can satisfy payee and presentment requirements where the nexus is established. Cash-loan contraventions under income-tax law do not, by themselves, render the underlying debt unenforceable. Revisional jurisdiction does not permit fresh appraisal of evidence absent perversity in concurrent findings.

Admission of a cheque signature activates statutory presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable debt, placing the drawer under a reverse onus to establish a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities. A lost-cheque account supported only by a General Diary entry and stop-payment instructions, without independent corroboration or prompt action, does not displace those presumptions. Absence of a written loan agreement or income-tax disclosure does not by itself negate a modest hand loan where the lender's financial capacity is not probably challenged. A proprietary concern has no legal identity separate from its sole proprietor. Revisional jurisdiction is limited to patent illegality, perversity, jurisdictional error, or gross miscarriage of justice.

Licensed surveyor assessments under the Insurance Act, 1938 are not conclusive but may determine insured loss unless displaced by cogent and reliable contrary material. Technical, expert, eyewitness, or documentary evidence may be required to challenge loss quantification, including depreciation, valuation, and underinsurance calculations. Where an insured cannot substantiate an error in the surveyor's assessment, enhanced insurance recovery is unavailable. Enhanced interest likewise requires an independent factual basis and cannot arise merely because the insured seeks a higher loss assessment. The principle permits reliance on licensed surveyor reports while allowing rebuttal through reliable evidence.

Retrospective withdrawal of net SGST reimbursement under IPR 2015 from cement manufacturing and grinding units is impermissible where an industrial unit acted on the policy, obtained approvals, invested and commenced production; financial implications alone do not establish overriding public interest to displace promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation. Policy revisions may operate prospectively. Section 11 of the Orissa Industries (Facilitation) Act, 2004 and applicable guidelines provide deemed approval of provisional Priority Sector status where a covered application remains undecided within the prescribed period. The Negative List does not apply where the investment threshold is exceeded and cement is manufactured with clinker, subject to verification and remaining policy conditions.

CENVAT credit for contractor services requires a transaction-wise review of work orders and invoices. The input-service exclusion applies only where a specified construction or works-contract service is used for constructing a building or civil structure, or for foundations or structures supporting capital goods; machinery installation, repair, maintenance and equipment hire are not automatically excluded. Extended limitation requires a proved act of fraud, suppression or other contravention with intent to evade; credits disclosed in statutory records and examined in audit cannot be denied on a mere interpretive dispute. Penalty cannot rest on unproved suppression or a new ground on remand. Interest arises only on credit within the normal period that is found ineligible and utilised.

CENVAT credit is admissible for 1%/2% additional duty of customs paid on imported coal because Rule 3(1)(vii) independently permits credit of additional customs duty equivalent to specified excise duties. The proviso to Rule 3(1)(i), which restricts credit of specified excise duty where a central excise exemption is used, does not apply to imported coal subject to additional customs duty under the customs exemption notification.

Scheduled predicate offences and material indicating transfer or layering of loan proceeds support a money-laundering investigation and the use of statutory summons to obtain evidence and documents. Pending challenges to the predicate FIR or investigation do not, by themselves, remove jurisdiction to investigate proceeds of crime. A proposed bank loan settlement or repayment does not independently terminate allegations involving fraud, forgery, or diversion of funds. Blanket protection from coercive action or arrest is not available through summons-quashing proceedings; anticipatory-bail relief must be sought through the competent court. Statutory investigation and compliance with summons may therefore continue.

Reasoned adjudicatory orders must disclose the evidence and reasons supporting a finding; reasoning cannot be inferred from factual narration or material outside the order's stated grounds. Although the company's explanation for seized Indian and foreign currency was accepted and it was exonerated of contraventions, the separate penalty finding against the appellant identified no further supporting material. The dismissal therefore required fresh, reasoned adjudication.

Authorised representatives of creditors in a class must both record consultation proceedings and prepare minutes identifying the consultation, date, participation, and creditors' views; contemporaneous emails may be incomplete where they omit participation details. They must obtain prior instructions before concurring to extensions for revised resolution plans, even if the request is administrative or time-bound. Under a graduated disciplinary regime, cancellation requires a proportionate response: absent fraud, dishonesty, personal gain, conflict, concealment, stakeholder prejudice, or prior misconduct, incomplete documentation and limited unauthorised procedural action may not justify the maximum sanction.

Remand for a fresh reasoned decision permits reappreciation of an enlarged record but requires reasons for departing from previously relevant matters. Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, a Section 9 application cannot serve as a recovery mechanism for genuinely contested operational debt: the inquiry is whether a plausible dispute existed before the demand notice, not whether the defence is conclusively proved. Returned goods, contemporaneous complaints, supporting media and laboratory material may establish a quality dispute, while contested evidentiary weight, contractual stipulations and liability remain for appropriate proceedings. Implied merchantable quality need not depend on a written quality clause. A plausible pre-existing quality dispute prevents insolvency admission.

Payment made as consideration under a share-purchase arrangement requires independent proof that it was disbursed against consideration for the time value of money before qualifying as financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Accounting classification as an unsecured loan, balance confirmations, interest entries, or tax-deduction entries may acknowledge an amount but do not alter the payment's original character. An unproven oral conversion into an interest-bearing loan cannot establish the required debt in summary insolvency proceedings. Clerical recording errors do not affect merits absent prejudice. Any available recovery must be pursued before the appropriate forum rather than through corporate insolvency.