Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Jurisdictional objection under section 124(3) failed because the assessee, after receiving notice and participating in the assessment without protest, was treated as having accepted the AO's territorial jurisdiction. For LTCG computation, the Tribunal held that the cost of acquisition of converted land could not be restricted merely because part of the area was left for roads and drainage; the full claimed cost with indexation had to be allowed. Where seized cash and surrounding material showed receipt of on-money, substitution of declared consideration with valuation-based fair market value was upheld. Interest under sections 234A and 234B was deleted because seized cash available with the Revenue should have been adjusted, while section 234C was confined to any default before seizure.
Jurisdictional objection under section 124(3) failed because the assessee, after receiving notice and participating in the assessment without protest, was treated as having accepted the AO's territorial jurisdiction. For LTCG computation, the Tribunal held that the cost of acquisition of converted land could not be restricted merely because part of the area was left for roads and drainage; the full claimed cost with indexation had to be allowed. Where seized cash and surrounding material showed receipt of on-money, substitution of declared consideration with valuation-based fair market value was upheld. Interest under sections 234A and 234B was deleted because seized cash available with the Revenue should have been adjusted, while section 234C was confined to any default before seizure.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.