The revised format for security cover is enclosed at Annexure I. Further, the obligations of listed entity and Debenture Trustee with respect to preparation and submission of security
Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) hereby reconstitutes Pension Advisory Committee constituted earlier vide Gazette Notification dated 16th September, 2020 with effect from 19th May, 2022. PENSION FUND REGULATORY AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 19th May, 2022 F. No. PFRDA/17/RES/25.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 45 of […]
Raychem RPG Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) We are not in agreement with the findings recorded by the Commissioner on the issue of limitation. Undisputedly all the facts were in the knowledge of the revenue and in fact have been corresponded between the revenue and appellant since 1993. For the clearance of […]
Ajeet Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) ITAT held that the amendment brought in the statue i.e., by Finance Act, 2021, the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act amended by inserting explanation 2 is prospective and not retrospective. Hence, the amended provisions of Section 43B r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act are not applicable […]
Jayaram Panda Vs Project Director (Orissa High Court) Sub-section (3) in section 31 mandates that the arbitral award shall state the reasons, upon which it is based unless, inter alia, it is to be made as per the clauses (a) and (b) in the sub-section. Said clauses do not apply in the facts and circumstances, […]
Geeta Singh Vs Pradeep Singh (Delhi High Court) If a company is a drawer of the cheque, it is a necessary party to proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the NI Act. The liability of a private person, in his capacity of a Director or any other authority to act on behalf of the Company, […]
Mere entries in third parties’ records of Transporters and brokers cannot be basis for clandestine removal. It is settled law that documents recovered from a third party can be used against the manufacturer to prove clandestine removal only when these are supported with corroborative evidences.
A notice which does not mention the particulars, on which the case against the person is based, cannot provide a foundation for the proceedings that follow.
ITAT held that non mentioning of relevant limb or non striking off of irrelevant limb in penalty notice is a substantive defect in imitation of proceedings itself and consequent penalty levied on the basis of such defective notice can not be sustained.
ENA and the Malt Spirit in its original form are not the alcoholic liquor fit for human consumption and would therefore, not come within the amended definition of clause(d) of Section 2 of the CST Act and in view thereof, the petitioner would not be entitled to get the ‘C’ Form, as claimed by the petitioner herein.
