111Review of decisions affecting duty credit

#### 111 Review of decisions affecting duty credit Applications may be made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for the review of decisions of the following kinds: (aa) a decision by the Secretary under subsection 6C(3) that the circumstances of a relationship between 2 persons do not fall within the circumstances set out in guidelines made under subsection 6C(2); (ab) a decision by the Secretary under subsection 6C(4) that it is not reasonable to allow the investment by an original investor to be treated as eligible investment by a participant; (ac) a decision by the Secretary under subparagraph 6C(5)(b)(i) that investment by an original investor, if undertaken by a participant, would not be eligible investment; (ad) a decision by the Secretary under subparagraph 6C(5)(b)(ii) that it is not reasonable to allow the investment by an original investor to be treated as eligible investment by a participant; (a) a decision by the Secretary under guidelines made under paragraph 9(3)(a) that a person was a party to a transaction that was not at arm’s length within the meaning of that section; (b) a decision by the Secretary under guidelines made under paragraph 9(3)(b) as to the production value or sales value of the motor vehicles, engines, or engine components to which a transaction that has been determined as not being at arm’s length relates; (c) a decision by the Secretary under guidelines made under paragraph 9(3)(c) as to the production value or sales value of the goods or services to which a transaction that has been determined as not being at arm’s length relates; (d) a decision by the Secretary under guidelines made under paragraph 9(3)(d) as to the amount of investment in plant and equipment services to which a transaction that has been determined as not being at arm’s length relates; (e) a decision by the Secretary under guidelines made under paragraph 9(3)(e) as to the amount of investment in research and development to which a transaction that has been determined as not being at arm’s length relates; (f) a decision by the Secretary under guidelines made under section 10 as to whether an ACIS participant is entitled to duty credit; (fa) a decision by the Secretary under subsection 42(1): (i) not to issue an MVP with unmodulated uncapped production credit; or (ii) as to the amount of any credit to be so issued; (g) a decision by the Secretary under section 56: (i) not to issue an MVP with modulated capped production credit; or (ii) as to the amount of any credit to be so issued; (h) a decision by the Secretary under section 57: (i) not to issue an MVP with modulated investment credit; or (ii) as to the amount of any credit to be so issued; (i) a decision by the Secretary under section 59: (i) not to issue an ACP, AMTP or ASP with modulated investment credit; or (ii) as to the amount of any credit to be so issued; (j) a decision under the R&D scheme: (i) not to issue an MVP with unmodulated type J investment credit; or (ii) as to the amount of any credit to be so issued.