Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
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.