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...
Writ jurisdiction may extend to a private bank when it acts as an Authorised Dealer under the FEMA-RBI framework and its refusal to process foreign exchange transactions is challenged as arbitrary. The article notes that contractual banking dealings do not exclude judicial review where a public law element exists, and that a clean-hands objection based on alleged suppression will not automatically bar a petition if the disputed facts are part of the main controversy. It also explains that the bank could require enhanced due diligence and refuse processing when later material raised sanctions-related concerns, with the writ court declining to reappreciate disputed commercial facts and no interference being made under Article 226.
Writ jurisdiction may extend to a private bank when it acts as an Authorised Dealer under the FEMA-RBI framework and its refusal to process foreign exchange transactions is challenged as arbitrary. The article notes that contractual banking dealings do not exclude judicial review where a public law element exists, and that a clean-hands objection based on alleged suppression will not automatically bar a petition if the disputed facts are part of the main controversy. It also explains that the bank could require enhanced due diligence and refuse processing when later material raised sanctions-related concerns, with the writ court declining to reappreciate disputed commercial facts and no interference being made under Article 226.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.