Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
AT dismissed the appeal seeking restitution and refund of trading losses allegedly caused by a technical glitch in the stock exchange trading system. The appellant, an experienced securities market participant, had executed the mandatory risk disclosure declaration under the applicable Master Circular, thereby acknowledging the inherent risks of electronic trading. AT noted SEBI's regulatory finding that the glitch was short-lived, with most gateways restored within minutes, and held that the appellant's contrary claim of a two-hour disruption required evidentiary proof. As the principal relief sought was compensatory damages of Rs. 53.13 lakhs, AT held such a tortious claim lies exclusively before a civil court of competent jurisdiction. Lacking jurisdiction to award damages, AT found the appeal devoid of merit and dismissed it.
AT dismissed the appeal seeking restitution and refund of trading losses allegedly caused by a technical glitch in the stock exchange trading system. The appellant, an experienced securities market participant, had executed the mandatory risk disclosure declaration under the applicable Master Circular, thereby acknowledging the inherent risks of electronic trading. AT noted SEBI's regulatory finding that the glitch was short-lived, with most gateways restored within minutes, and held that the appellant's contrary claim of a two-hour disruption required evidentiary proof. As the principal relief sought was compensatory damages of Rs. 53.13 lakhs, AT held such a tortious claim lies exclusively before a civil court of competent jurisdiction. Lacking jurisdiction to award damages, AT found the appeal devoid of merit and dismissed it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
