Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
The case involved the maintainability of rectification applications u/s 35C of the Central Excise Act. The CESTAT held that orders under 35C are final, not deciding references. Referring to previous rulings, the Tribunal established that rectification applications for orders under 35C are not maintainable. The argument that a Larger Bench's order should be considered final due to Division Bench compliance was rejected. Consequently, rectification applications for mistakes in an interim order were deemed not maintainable, leading to the rejection of five such applications.
The case involved the maintainability of rectification applications u/s 35C of the Central Excise Act. The CESTAT held that orders under 35C are final, not deciding references. Referring to previous rulings, the Tribunal established that rectification applications for orders under 35C are not maintainable. The argument that a Larger Bench's order should be considered final due to Division Bench compliance was rejected. Consequently, rectification applications for mistakes in an interim order were deemed not maintainable, leading to the rejection of five such applications.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.