Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Deduction under section 36(1)(vii) was held to operate distinctly from provision-based deduction under section 36(1)(viia), and the proviso was applied only to prevent double deduction; on the facts already accepted in earlier years, no duplication was shown, so the disallowance of bad debts written off was deleted. The Tribunal also held that earlier coordinate bench rulings remained binding despite pending High Court appeals in the absence of any stay or reversal, and the Revenue's challenge failed. On the amortised lease premium issue, the Tribunal applied section 158A because an identical question of law was already pending before the High Court, and directed that the final High Court decision be applied to the years in appeal.
Deduction under section 36(1)(vii) was held to operate distinctly from provision-based deduction under section 36(1)(viia), and the proviso was applied only to prevent double deduction; on the facts already accepted in earlier years, no duplication was shown, so the disallowance of bad debts written off was deleted. The Tribunal also held that earlier coordinate bench rulings remained binding despite pending High Court appeals in the absence of any stay or reversal, and the Revenue's challenge failed. On the amortised lease premium issue, the Tribunal applied section 158A because an identical question of law was already pending before the High Court, and directed that the final High Court decision be applied to the years in appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
