Interactive flat panels meeting automatic data processing conditions are distinguished from monitors, while later classification clarifications apply ...
Statutory transfer formalities invalidated alleged share and property transfers, while retrospective record manipulation constituted oppression and mi...
Page of 4788
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 95749 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Impleading of the Jurisdictional Commissioner as another respondent alongwith Commissioner (Adjudication) - The Tribunal examined Rule 12 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, which states who may be joined as respondents. It was clarified that the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner concerned should be impleaded as the respondent. The Tribunal interpreted the term "concerned" to mean the Commissionerate issuing the show cause notice, making the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of that Commissionerate the relevant party to the case. - The Tribunal found that there was no restriction on impleading more than one respondent in appeals filed, especially in cases involving multiple jurisdictions.
Impleading of the Jurisdictional Commissioner as another respondent alongwith Commissioner (Adjudication) - The Tribunal examined Rule 12 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, which states who may be joined as respondents. It was clarified that the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner concerned should be impleaded as the respondent. The Tribunal interpreted the term "concerned" to mean the Commissionerate issuing the show cause notice, making the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of that Commissionerate the relevant party to the case. - The Tribunal found that there was no restriction on impleading more than one respondent in appeals filed, especially in cases involving multiple jurisdictions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
