Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Seeking review of order - error apparent on the face of record or not - The court acknowledged the existence of the amendment to Paragraph 9.3 of the Handbook of Procedures and recognized its relevance to the case. However, it concluded that the amendment had been duly considered in the earlier order, and there was no error apparent on the face of the record regarding its application. In line with the respondents' argument, the court emphasized that a review cannot be used as a disguised appeal. It cited a Supreme Court decision that cautioned against exceeding jurisdiction in review applications and reiterated the principle that a review cannot reevaluate evidence already considered in the main petition.
Seeking review of order - error apparent on the face of record or not - The court acknowledged the existence of the amendment to Paragraph 9.3 of the Handbook of Procedures and recognized its relevance to the case. However, it concluded that the amendment had been duly considered in the earlier order, and there was no error apparent on the face of the record regarding its application. In line with the respondents' argument, the court emphasized that a review cannot be used as a disguised appeal. It cited a Supreme Court decision that cautioned against exceeding jurisdiction in review applications and reiterated the principle that a review cannot reevaluate evidence already considered in the main petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
