Donor-directed corpus contributions retain capital character despite exemption claims under section 10(23C)(vi), preventing their treatment as taxable...
Enhanced tax-audit threshold applies where banking records establish compliant non-cash receipts and payments, eliminating penalty exposure for audit ...
Transfer pricing consistency protects identical non-interest-bearing debenture terms from a later notional-interest adjustment without valid statutory...
Rectification of debatable deduction claims cannot reverse scrutiny-approved co-operative society interest income deductions as apparent record errors...
Cash-method accounting bars presumptive interest taxation, while unsupported securities and share-trading additions require reliable material and veri...
Section 7 admission requires established financial debt and default, not precise interest quantification, while post-suspension defaults remain action...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 37A(1) of FEMA was held to apply where a foreign immovable property continued to be held by a resident in India on the date of seizure, even if acquired before the provision came into force; the challenge based on retrospective application therefore failed and the authorised officer had a prima facie basis to invoke seizure power. However, once the foreign property had been transferred and equivalent foreign exchange had been repatriated into India, the object of Section 37A was satisfied and the seizure of the equivalent asset in India was set aside under the proviso to Section 37A(4), leaving open adjudication for the earlier period of alleged contravention.
Section 37A(1) of FEMA was held to apply where a foreign immovable property continued to be held by a resident in India on the date of seizure, even if acquired before the provision came into force; the challenge based on retrospective application therefore failed and the authorised officer had a prima facie basis to invoke seizure power. However, once the foreign property had been transferred and equivalent foreign exchange had been repatriated into India, the object of Section 37A was satisfied and the seizure of the equivalent asset in India was set aside under the proviso to Section 37A(4), leaving open adjudication for the earlier period of alleged contravention.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
