Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
International cargo transhipment through Indian ports continues with Customs-controlled storage, re-export safeguards, and coordinated multi-station m...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 54F requires purchase of the new residential house within the statutory period, and an unregistered banakhat by itself was not enough to prove completion of purchase within that time frame. Because the substantial payment was made more than one year before transfer and the registered sale deed was executed beyond two years after transfer, the deduction could not be sustained on the existing record; the issue was restored for limited verification of the flow of funds and linkage with sale proceeds. The addition under section 69 also required fresh factual examination, as the bank statements and documentary evidence were not properly verified and it was unclear whether all material had been before the AO. Both matters were remanded.
Section 54F requires purchase of the new residential house within the statutory period, and an unregistered banakhat by itself was not enough to prove completion of purchase within that time frame. Because the substantial payment was made more than one year before transfer and the registered sale deed was executed beyond two years after transfer, the deduction could not be sustained on the existing record; the issue was restored for limited verification of the flow of funds and linkage with sale proceeds. The addition under section 69 also required fresh factual examination, as the bank statements and documentary evidence were not properly verified and it was unclear whether all material had been before the AO. Both matters were remanded.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
