Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
A pure question of law bearing on taxability could be raised before the Tribunal even if not taken earlier, as Rule 10 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 permits additional grounds subject to hearing the other side. The service tax demand for April 2009 to June 2010 failed because it related to the same residential project already dealt with in the appellant's own case, where the earlier order had been set aside; the present demand had no surviving foundation and was also set aside. For July 2010 to March 2011, the demand under construction of complex service was unsustainable because the activity was composite in nature, as reflected by the abatement granted in the notice, and post-01.07.2010 such activity fell outside that category.
A pure question of law bearing on taxability could be raised before the Tribunal even if not taken earlier, as Rule 10 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 permits additional grounds subject to hearing the other side. The service tax demand for April 2009 to June 2010 failed because it related to the same residential project already dealt with in the appellant's own case, where the earlier order had been set aside; the present demand had no surviving foundation and was also set aside. For July 2010 to March 2011, the demand under construction of complex service was unsustainable because the activity was composite in nature, as reflected by the abatement granted in the notice, and post-01.07.2010 such activity fell outside that category.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.