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...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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 4827 
Join Channel 
