Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 24 (0.40 seconds)

Swatch Group India Pvt Ltd & Ors. vs Union Of India & Ors. on 16 August, 2023

Swatch Group India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 SCC OnLine Del 4938 "43. We have perused the documents and letters produced by the Department as referred above. It is seen that for a period of almost three years, various letters were exchanged. The matter was fixed for personal hearing on more than five occasions. No reason has been provided as to why the hearings were not concluded on the said dates and the duties payable, if any, were not determined.
Delhi High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 1 - V Bakhru - Full Document

M/S Vos Technologies India Pvt. Ltd vs The Principal Additional Director ... on 17 May, 2021

M/s Vos Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Principal Additional Director General & Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 8756 "85. The position which thus emerges from the aforesaid discussion and a review of the legal precedents is that the respondents are bound and obliged in law to endeavour to conclude adjudication with due expedition. Matters which have the potential of casting financial liabilities or penal consequences cannot be kept pending for years and decades together. A statute enabling an authority to conclude proceedings within a stipulated period of time "where it is possible to do so" cannot be countenanced as a license to keep matters unresolved for years. The flexibility which the statute confers is not liable to be construed as sanctioning lethargy or indolence. Ultimately it is incumbent upon the authority to establish that it was genuinely hindered and impeded in resolving the dispute with reasonable speed and dispatch. A statutory authority when faced with such a challenge would be obligated to prove that it was either impracticable to proceed or it was constricted by factors beyond its control which prevented it from moving with reasonable expedition. This principle would apply equally to cases falling either under the Customs Act, the 1994 Act or the CGST Act."
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document

Mangali Impex Ltd vs Union Of India And Ors on 3 May, 2016

7. It is the case of the Department that, in the meantime, the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Mangli Impex Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. [2016:DHC:3435-DB] was rendered on 30th May, 2017, due to which the impugned SCN was put in the call book and the same was taken out from the call book sometime in November, 2017. It is stated that the Department had already provided the Petitioner Company with all the RUDs through speed post on 20th March, 2014, however, the Petitioner Company continued W.P.(C) 15195/2023 Page 8 of 18 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:22.01.2025 11:32 to request for all RUDs and non-relied upon documents to delay the proceedings. Thereafter, as per the Department there was a halt on the adjudication proceedings during the 2019-2020 period due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
1   2 3 Next