Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
This case deals with the maintainability of appeals filed by the Airports Economic Regulatory Authority (AERA) against orders of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) u/s 31 of the AERA Act. The key points are: AERA has a statutory duty to regulate tariffs for aeronautical services, considering various factors to ensure economically viable airports without compromising public interest. As AERA is interested in preserving public interest concerns animating the statute, it is a necessary party in appeals against its tariff orders before TDSAT. While judicial/quasi-judicial authorities are generally not impleaded as respondents in appeals against their orders, this principle is not absolute. The evolution of the fairness doctrine has transcended boundaries, and all administrative actions must comply with natural justice principles. Section 31 does not expressly confer the power to appeal on any party. However, at a minimum, parties to the appeal before the first appellate body (TDSAT) have the right to file an appeal before the Supreme Court. Since AERA is a necessary party before TDSAT, it can file appeals u/s 31. Consequently, the appeals filed by AERA against TDSAT orders u/s 31 of the AERA Act are maintainable.
This case deals with the maintainability of appeals filed by the Airports Economic Regulatory Authority (AERA) against orders of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) u/s 31 of the AERA Act. The key points are: AERA has a statutory duty to regulate tariffs for aeronautical services, considering various factors to ensure economically viable airports without compromising public interest. As AERA is interested in preserving public interest concerns animating the statute, it is a necessary party in appeals against its tariff orders before TDSAT. While judicial/quasi-judicial authorities are generally not impleaded as respondents in appeals against their orders, this principle is not absolute. The evolution of the fairness doctrine has transcended boundaries, and all administrative actions must comply with natural justice principles. Section 31 does not expressly confer the power to appeal on any party. However, at a minimum, parties to the appeal before the first appellate body (TDSAT) have the right to file an appeal before the Supreme Court. Since AERA is a necessary party before TDSAT, it can file appeals u/s 31. Consequently, the appeals filed by AERA against TDSAT orders u/s 31 of the AERA Act are maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
