Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
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.