C.M.P.13966/2024 in T.C.A.122/2024 - party names not stated in this source

1. FACTS OF THE CASE

CMP 13966/2024 in TCA 122/2024 sought dispensation from producing the certified copy of the Tribunal order dated 22 December 2023 in IT(TP)A 23/Chny/2020. The body also refers to TCA SR 67128/2024. Party names are absent from the supplied order.

Source: PDF p.1

2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT

The Court was satisfied with the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit. Those reasons are not reproduced, and no transfer-pricing issue or question of law is discussed.

Source: PDF p.1

3. JUDICIAL DECISION

Production of the certified copy was dispensed with “for the present”. The miscellaneous petition was ordered accordingly.

Source: PDF p.1

4. OUTCOME

The appellant obtained a temporary procedural dispensation on 11 July 2024. The order does not decide the appeal, affirm or reverse the Tribunal, or permanently waive the document requirement.

Source: PDF p.1

5. Expert Comments

AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings.

The qualification controls the relief

The words “for the present” prevent this order from being treated as an unconditional permanent exemption. It permits the appeal process to proceed at that stage without the certified copy, while leaving any later document direction to the court record.

Source: PDF p.1

Identify the correct document

The dispensation concerns the Tribunal order dated 22 December 2023 in IT(TP)A 23/Chny/2020, not every annexure or an unspecified assessment order. TCA 122/2024 and the body’s SR 67128/2024 reference should travel together when tracing this ancillary order.

Source: PDF p.1

An affidavit-based procedural decision

The Court accepted affidavit reasons without setting them out. It supplies neither a general exemption test nor a merits ruling on transfer pricing. The docket title is used because the original does not state the litigants’ names.

Source: PDF p.1