TOPmost
Linkedin
e'legal
Next Related Article Below (TO be read as Supplement to* )
<<<<<
An ongoing debate, of not merely academic interest , but of most concern to client (-ele) >
Selecting randomly from the displayed
comments , the point requiring focus seems to be summed up here, -
“I'm most excited about COMPANIES LIKE LEX MACHINA that, as you say, ARE MAKING IT EASIER FOR LAWYERS TO DO THEIR JOBS AND DO THEM BETTER.” (FONT supplied)
To put it differently, and frankly viewing, - as a retired professional no longer active in law practice, hence having admittedly no intimate knowledge in such discussions primarily based on but centred on latest innovative ideas, - can say, provoked by own courage of conviction this: May be, granting against all odds, machine will make it easier for lawyers to do their jobs.; but not so sure whether it could even remotely serve the purpose of doing their jobs better.
What one has in mind is the commonly acknowledged most worrisome facet namely, - ever growing complexity of the modern day legislation. As repeatedly said, rather openly with remorse, in recent times by eminent jurists, the cause, if traced to the grass root, lies in inept but impulsive drafting of laws. So much so, any lawyer, howsoever otherwise qualified or equipped, is not enabled to fulfil the common expectation of him, to function as a ‘catalyst’ in the realm of ‘case law’ (that is, it’s making); and for the ultimate benefit of clientele / litigating public.
As visualized, even if were to wildly imagine, there is one area most certainly calling for an insightful and intelligent debate ; that is, on the proposition whether, and to what extent,- Machine can replace Man.
To identify that area, and help in anyone modulating own line of independent thinking, the following extract from a published article in a Indian tax journal could be of assistance:
Though it is wprt the Indian context, to be honest, none having exposure or experience in the realm of administration of law / can deny that the principles of guidance as reflected upon are to be taken to have a universal application.
Over to law experts at large, for further insightful deliberation; do so ideally bearing upfront in mind the basic facts, representing reality of life, wprt the topic of , - Machine or/vs Man (Can ‘machine’ ever be a substitute, - any way /day a wholesome substitute, - for Man (i.e. the lawyers) to do their jobs ‘better’ in ts true sense / dimensions)
e'legal
Next Related Article Below (TO be read as Supplement to* )
| ||||||||
Look up COMMENT shared on Facebook
TG
TG
Assessment
framed in the name of non-existing entity due to amalgamation cannot be cured
by provision of section 292Bi
Conclusion: A company
ceases to exist after amalgamation. Thus, assessment upon a dissolved company
is impermissible as there is no provision in Income Tax Act to make an
assessment thereupon.
Direct
Link to download full text of the above Judgment/
Order from official website–
<<<<<
An ongoing debate, of not merely academic interest , but of most concern to client (-ele) >
*MAN or MACHINE – A Dialogue
Source of Inspiration –
 |
Groups
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||
Read HERE
|
|||||||||
<
<> Begging at the outset to be excused, particularly by those men of eminence found to be sincerely initiating , and seriously participating, in the subject discussion:
<> Begging at the outset to be excused, particularly by those men of eminence found to be sincerely initiating , and seriously participating, in the subject discussion:
“I'm most excited about COMPANIES LIKE LEX MACHINA that, as you say, ARE MAKING IT EASIER FOR LAWYERS TO DO THEIR JOBS AND DO THEM BETTER.” (FONT supplied)
To put it differently, and frankly viewing, - as a retired professional no longer active in law practice, hence having admittedly no intimate knowledge in such discussions primarily based on but centred on latest innovative ideas, - can say, provoked by own courage of conviction this: May be, granting against all odds, machine will make it easier for lawyers to do their jobs.; but not so sure whether it could even remotely serve the purpose of doing their jobs better.
What one has in mind is the commonly acknowledged most worrisome facet namely, - ever growing complexity of the modern day legislation. As repeatedly said, rather openly with remorse, in recent times by eminent jurists, the cause, if traced to the grass root, lies in inept but impulsive drafting of laws. So much so, any lawyer, howsoever otherwise qualified or equipped, is not enabled to fulfil the common expectation of him, to function as a ‘catalyst’ in the realm of ‘case law’ (that is, it’s making); and for the ultimate benefit of clientele / litigating public.
As visualized, even if were to wildly imagine, there is one area most certainly calling for an insightful and intelligent debate ; that is, on the proposition whether, and to what extent,- Machine can replace Man.
To identify that area, and help in anyone modulating own line of independent thinking, the following extract from a published article in a Indian tax journal could be of assistance:
Q
INTRODUCTION
1. The Income-tax Act,
1961 (‘the Act’) embodying the law of income-tax is a comprehensive and
complete code in itself. As such, anything done, or purported to be done,
under the Act has to be necessarily in accordance with its general and/or
special provisions. For ensuring that it is so, basically, one
should have sufficient familiarity with the general scheme as well as
the applicable special provisions of the Act; also, have a proper understanding and
appreciation in the right perspective of the scheme and the provisions. As ruled by the Courts, the
Act must be read as a whole;
thereafter the same should be considered Chapter- by-Chapter, then
section-by-section, and ultimately word-by-word. Further, the
provisions should be so construed as to make a consistent enactment of the
whole statute.
For
a proper compliance, it is essential that the taxpayers should have knowledge,
in the true sense of the term, of the law. It is all the more essential that
the officers and authorities appointed/empowered under the Act should equip
themselves with a thorough and intimate knowledge of/familiarity with the law,
more so of the case law, so as to properly discharge their respective duties
and responsibilities of implementation, enforcement, so as to facilitate smooth
administration and object adjudication. For evaluating as to how far the
concerned authorities are really committed or disposed to live up to such
expectations of them as aforesaid, a close review of the decided cases, eminently
on such lines as attempted in the case study herein below, could be of help.
UQ
(Ref. Article - APEX COURT ON
ILLEGAL BUSINESS - A STUDY - (2006)
160 TAXMAN 145 – requested to read in full, for a better appreciation of its contextual
relevance herein)
Though it is wprt the Indian context, to be honest, none having exposure or experience in the realm of administration of law / can deny that the principles of guidance as reflected upon are to be taken to have a universal application.
Over to law experts at large, for further insightful deliberation; do so ideally bearing upfront in mind the basic facts, representing reality of life, wprt the topic of , - Machine or/vs Man (Can ‘machine’ ever be a substitute, - any way /day a wholesome substitute, - for Man (i.e. the lawyers) to do their jobs ‘better’ in ts true sense / dimensions)
Tail piece (to share in a different vein; and importantly, to provoke thoughts
but on more suited lines to fit into the above context )
Expert
advice: People who make sure that our problems remain permanently our problems
- TOI Blogs
Cross refer:
|
vswami 4 July 2015
As shared on FAcebook:
As shared on FAcebook:
< Referring selectively
to a displayed comment, it says - “I'm most excited about COMPANIES LIKE LEX MACHINA that,
as you say, ARE MAKING IT EASIER FOR LAWYERS TO DO THEIR JOBS AND DO THEM
BETTER.” (FONT supplied)
Even granting
but not fully agreeing that lawyer’s
jobs may be made easier by any such sophiscated
machine , one has own reservation against it helping to do jobs better. Be that as it
may, there is one area in which a machine can , for obvious reasons, be of no such
help or foolproof substitute to human. To pinpoint: As per Indian case law
(wprt tax law), for reading and understanding any enactment in proper light, following
guidelines need to be followed:
The law on income-tax
is a comprehensive and complete code in itself. As such, anything done, or
purported to be done, under the Act has to be necessarily in accordance
with its general and/or special provisions. For ensuring that it is so, basically,
one should have sufficient familiarity with the general scheme as well as
the applicable special provisions of the Act; also, have a proper understanding
and appreciation in the right perspective of the scheme and the provisions.
As ruled by the Courts, the Act must be read as a whole; thereafter the
same should be considered Chapter- by-Chapter, then section-by-section,
and ultimately word-by-word. Further, the provisions should be so
construed as to make a consistent enactment of the whole statute.
The doubt is, - can any machine, howsoever sophisticated /
advanced it be, do all these, same way as a human!>
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete