Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6361 to 6380 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal held that a later company petition could not be used to reopen reliefs already refused or deemed refused in an earlier final order. The liberty reserved in the prior judgment was confined to grievances arising from actions taken pursuant to the EGM directed thereunder, and did not authorise re-agitation of the entire controversy. As the later petition was substantially based on alleged non-compliance with the earlier order, the proper course was execution of that order, not a fresh petition. The Tribunal also applied res judicata and the principle underlying Order II Rule 2, finding substantial overlap with earlier claims and matters that could have been raised before. The appeal was dismissed.
The Appellate Tribunal held that a later company petition could not be used to reopen reliefs already refused or deemed refused in an earlier final order. The liberty reserved in the prior judgment was confined to grievances arising from actions taken pursuant to the EGM directed thereunder, and did not authorise re-agitation of the entire controversy. As the later petition was substantially based on alleged non-compliance with the earlier order, the proper course was execution of that order, not a fresh petition. The Tribunal also applied res judicata and the principle underlying Order II Rule 2, finding substantial overlap with earlier claims and matters that could have been raised before. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
