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...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Gross violation of CBEC instructions and the precedential value of CESTAT decisions. The Revenue filed an appeal before the first Appellate Authority without specifying grounds or reasons for departing from the Tribunal's order followed by the Adjudicating Authority. Section 35R(4) is applicable only to the Commissioner (Appeals) and Appellate Tribunal, requiring them to consider circumstances under which an earlier order was accepted and not challenged. This section does not set aside the principle of judicial precedents and the binding nature of higher Appellate Authority orders. Authorities below the Tribunal are bound by its earlier orders. The impugned order set aside the original authority's order solely because the Tribunal's order was accepted due to monetary limits, without stating grounds contrary to the Tribunal's observations. The original authority kept demand notices awaiting the Tribunal's decision and adjudicated accordingly after it set aside the order. The impugned order lacked merits for differing from the available higher Appellate Authority order without specifying grounds, leading to the appeal being allowed.
Gross violation of CBEC instructions and the precedential value of CESTAT decisions. The Revenue filed an appeal before the first Appellate Authority without specifying grounds or reasons for departing from the Tribunal's order followed by the Adjudicating Authority. Section 35R(4) is applicable only to the Commissioner (Appeals) and Appellate Tribunal, requiring them to consider circumstances under which an earlier order was accepted and not challenged. This section does not set aside the principle of judicial precedents and the binding nature of higher Appellate Authority orders. Authorities below the Tribunal are bound by its earlier orders. The impugned order set aside the original authority's order solely because the Tribunal's order was accepted due to monetary limits, without stating grounds contrary to the Tribunal's observations. The original authority kept demand notices awaiting the Tribunal's decision and adjudicated accordingly after it set aside the order. The impugned order lacked merits for differing from the available higher Appellate Authority order without specifying grounds, leading to the appeal being allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
