Business reorganisation requires recognition of successor's modified return; draft orders against dissolved transferor quashed and fresh review direct...
Pre-commencement R&D deduction denied where business had not commenced; deeming benefit requires tangible start of manufacture or commercial exploitat...
The dominant legal issue is whether the statutory pre-deposit under Section 129E is mandatory and if judicial relief can permit conditional compliance; the court affirmed the pre-deposit requirement is mandatory and CESTAT acquires jurisdiction only on compliance, but recognised that Article 226 relief may be exercised where financial hardship is pleaded to prevent appellate rights becoming illusory, and therefore permitted staged instalmental compliance; outcome: the appellant was allowed to deposit the directed sum in instalments, CESTAT to entertain the appeal on production of the initial instalment, and final adjudication to be pronounced only after full deposit, with the Single Judge's order set aside.
The dominant legal issue is whether the statutory pre-deposit under Section 129E is mandatory and if judicial relief can permit conditional compliance; the court affirmed the pre-deposit requirement is mandatory and CESTAT acquires jurisdiction only on compliance, but recognised that Article 226 relief may be exercised where financial hardship is pleaded to prevent appellate rights becoming illusory, and therefore permitted staged instalmental compliance; outcome: the appellant was allowed to deposit the directed sum in instalments, CESTAT to entertain the appeal on production of the initial instalment, and final adjudication to be pronounced only after full deposit, with the Single Judge's order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
