Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Blacklisting viewed as drastic remedy, orders subjected to rigorous scrutiny. Objective satisfaction required for disability created by blacklisting order. Comprehensive guidelines for debarment issued to protect public interest from non-responsible, dishonest, or illegal conduct contractors. Blacklisting debarment from dealings with concerned employer and other entities. Appellant paid Rs. 3,71,96,265 though outstanding Rs. 14,63,24,727 per Corporation. Issues between parties regarding reciprocal obligations in bid document from inception. Impugned judgment set aside, appeal allowed.
Blacklisting viewed as drastic remedy, orders subjected to rigorous scrutiny. Objective satisfaction required for disability created by blacklisting order. Comprehensive guidelines for debarment issued to protect public interest from non-responsible, dishonest, or illegal conduct contractors. Blacklisting debarment from dealings with concerned employer and other entities. Appellant paid Rs. 3,71,96,265 though outstanding Rs. 14,63,24,727 per Corporation. Issues between parties regarding reciprocal obligations in bid document from inception. Impugned judgment set aside, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.