Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Tribunal held that an order passed following binding precedents...
Tribunal: Order based on binding precedent can't be recalled/reviewed due to later contrary higher court judgment. Final order can't be reopened u/s 254(2).
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Tribunal held that an order passed following binding precedents cannot be recalled or reviewed based on a subsequent contrary judgment of a higher court. Once an order attains finality between parties, it cannot be reopened or reviewed u/s 254(2) due to a later overruling judgment. The power u/s 254(2) is akin to Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC and cannot be exercised beyond the scope of review under that provision. Consequently, the department's application seeking recall of the Tribunal's order based on a subsequent Supreme Court judgment was dismissed.
Tribunal held that an order passed following binding precedents cannot be recalled or reviewed based on a subsequent contrary judgment of a higher court. Once an order attains finality between parties, it cannot be reopened or reviewed u/s 254(2) due to a later overruling judgment. The power u/s 254(2) is akin to Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC and cannot be exercised beyond the scope of review under that provision. Consequently, the department's application seeking recall of the Tribunal's order based on a subsequent Supreme Court judgment was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.