Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Governmental Authority or not - The Board of the applicant i.e., “Sri Satya Sai Water Supply Project Board” consists of 9 Members, out of which 7 are officers /Employees of the Government of Andhra Pradesh that qualifies for 77% of Government control falling short of the designated 90% as required by the Act. Even the cost of the operation and maintenance of the water supply scheme is contributed at a ratio of 70% by the State Government, while 30% of the cost is being borne by the applicant from the water charges collected from the users - In the instant case the applicant falls short of the qualifying mark of 90% in terms of equity or control. Hence the applicant does not fit in the category of “Governmental authority”.
Governmental Authority or not - The Board of the applicant i.e., “Sri Satya Sai Water Supply Project Board” consists of 9 Members, out of which 7 are officers /Employees of the Government of Andhra Pradesh that qualifies for 77% of Government control falling short of the designated 90% as required by the Act. Even the cost of the operation and maintenance of the water supply scheme is contributed at a ratio of 70% by the State Government, while 30% of the cost is being borne by the applicant from the water charges collected from the users - In the instant case the applicant falls short of the qualifying mark of 90% in terms of equity or control. Hence the applicant does not fit in the category of “Governmental authority”.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
