Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The High Court considered the maintainability of a review petition based on a subsequent judgment and the condonation of a 619-day delay in filing the civil review petition. The appellant attributed the delay to the Counsel's actions. The main issue was the entitlement of exemption u/s 80-P(2)(a)(i) and the taxability of transfer charges received by the Samiti. The Court referred to a Supreme Court decision regarding the nature of transfer charges. The Court held that a decision based on a question of law, if subsequently reversed or modified by a superior court, does not form grounds for review. The Court noted a split verdict in another Supreme Court case. The Court emphasized that entertaining a review petition ignoring statutory provisions would create uncertainty. Consequently, the appeal for condonation of the delay in filing the civil review petition was dismissed.
The High Court considered the maintainability of a review petition based on a subsequent judgment and the condonation of a 619-day delay in filing the civil review petition. The appellant attributed the delay to the Counsel's actions. The main issue was the entitlement of exemption u/s 80-P(2)(a)(i) and the taxability of transfer charges received by the Samiti. The Court referred to a Supreme Court decision regarding the nature of transfer charges. The Court held that a decision based on a question of law, if subsequently reversed or modified by a superior court, does not form grounds for review. The Court noted a split verdict in another Supreme Court case. The Court emphasized that entertaining a review petition ignoring statutory provisions would create uncertainty. Consequently, the appeal for condonation of the delay in filing the civil review petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.