Trademark depreciation and section 14A adjustments: ITAT applies consistency, independent book-profit computation, and no disallowance without exempt ...
Rebuttable search presumptions and corroboration standards shaped deletion of unsubstantiated additions, while rental income and limited profit estima...
Recall under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules was held confined to apparent procedural or similar infirmity in the order itself and could not be used to reopen a merits decision. The Tribunal treated a recall application based on later-discovered documents as a disguised attempt to seek review, which the Code does not permit, and held that subsequent material cannot justify recalling an order passed on merits. It also held that once the original section 9 order had been affirmed in appeal, it could not thereafter be reopened by recall. The appeal was dismissed and rejection of the recall application upheld.
Recall under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules was held confined to apparent procedural or similar infirmity in the order itself and could not be used to reopen a merits decision. The Tribunal treated a recall application based on later-discovered documents as a disguised attempt to seek review, which the Code does not permit, and held that subsequent material cannot justify recalling an order passed on merits. It also held that once the original section 9 order had been affirmed in appeal, it could not thereafter be reopened by recall. The appeal was dismissed and rejection of the recall application upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
