Skip to main content

Person with judicial background to preside over tribunals

The common practice of keeping vacancies of chairpersons in tribunals pending for long periods and allowing bureaucrats to act as their heads received another blow, this time from the Gujarat High Court. The State Electricity Regulatory Commission was topless for a long time and one technical member was presiding over it along with a former employee of the electricity board. This was challenged by Utility Users' Welfare Association. Allowing most of its prayers, the high court stated that since "the vacancy of chairperson was not filled up for a long time and a large number of litigants are waiting for adjudication, the state government is directed to undertake the process for making the appointment of chairperson at the earliest, but not later than three months." The court ruled that the powers exercised by the commission are equal to that of a civil court and so a person with judicial background must preside over it as far as possible. Otherwise, it may result in the exercise of "un-channelised and unguided option" made available to the state. Further, if the person to be appointed as chairperson is not having experience of judicial proceedings, "the commission may be comprising of all persons having knowledge of engineering, finance, commerce, economics or management. If such situation is created on account of the aforesaid interpretation of the provisions of the Electricity Act, the commission would be manned by persons having no experience whatsoever of the judicial proceedings, much less as that of the Civil Court."

 Article referred: www.business-stanåçdard.com/article/opinion/cap-on-tax-benefit-to-charities-115101800761_1.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/
Post a Comment
Read more

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...
Post a Comment
Read more