Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Insolvency and BankruptcySeptember 5, 2022Case LawsAT
Scope of pronouncing of judgement - The law does not permit that the case is heard by one entity and the order is pronounced by another who has not heard the case at all. In such circumstances, the question posed is hereby answered in favour of the Appellant and it is held that the order dated 10.01.2018, having been passed by a bench in which one of the member was not a member of the bench who had heard the matter at the time when it was reserved, is patently illegal and void ab-initio. - AT
Scope of pronouncing of judgement - The law does not permit that the case is heard by one entity and the order is pronounced by another who has not heard the case at all. In such circumstances, the question posed is hereby answered in favour of the Appellant and it is held that the order dated 10.01.2018, having been passed by a bench in which one of the member was not a member of the bench who had heard the matter at the time when it was reserved, is patently illegal and void ab-initio. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.