Pre-enactment land-sale agreements escape stamp-duty value substitution where substantial banking-channel consideration was received before Section 43...
Customs valuation and classification require comparable evidence and assessment of imported goods in their actual condition, invalidating related pena...
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 4828 
Join Channel 
