Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
