https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15315 Judicial review of Settlement Commission orders under Article 226 is limited to grave procedural defect, violation of natural justice, absence of nexus between reasons and conclusion, contravention of the Act, or an error apparent on the face of the record. A determination that development expenditure is capital in nature involves application of law to facts and interpretation of the underlying agreement, matters lying substantially within the Commission's domain. On that basis, the Commission's view on the expenditure character was treated as outside the permissible scope of writ interference and the writ petitions failed. en-us Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 02 May 2010 23:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15315 Judicial review of Settlement Commission orders under Article 226 is limited to grave procedural defect, violation of natural justice, absence of nexus between reasons and conclusion, contravention of the Act, or an error apparent on the face of the record. A determination that development expenditure is capital in nature involves application of law to facts and interpretation of the underlying agreement, matters lying substantially within the Commission's domain. On that basis, the Commission's view on the expenditure character was treated as outside the permissible scope of writ interference and the writ petitions failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15315