Held that invalidity of sanction is different from absence of sanction and the point is to be raised during the trial.
Held that TDI was not seeking a review, but rather, a discharge/ modification of the conditions prescribed in the said interim order. Accordingly, Arbitral Tribunal was entitled to exercise the said option, having regard to the principles enshrined under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of CPC.
Held that option is available to the appellant to claim cenvat credit on service tax paid on input services received in its SEZ units instead of claiming benefit of exemption notification.
Held that the Adjudicating Authority has not erred in passing the Impugned Order rejecting the revised resolution plan due to lapse of stipulated time period of more than 330 days in CIRP.
Held that if a loan or advance is given to a shareholder as a consequence of any consideration which is beneficial to the company, in such a case, the advance or loan cannot be said to be a deemed dividend.
Held that freight incurred from the place of removal to the buyer’s premises is not includible in the assessable value and accordingly excise is not payable on the same.
Held that keeping in view the gravity of the crime, it being socio-economic offence, petitioner is not entitled for pre-arrest bail.
It can be held that even before the issue of process or examining the sworn statement of the complainant, there could be cognizance in a particular case.
Held that import of gold is not prohibited, but restricted subject to prescribed quantity on payment of duty.
Held that antecedents cannot be an evidence for the alleged undervaluation of the goods. At best antecedents may be a reason for creating a suspicion and be a reason for causing an enquiry or Investigation.
