Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Negative due date rate in cash-settled crude oil futures was upheld because the contract specifications tied settlement to the NYMEX front-month settlement price converted into rupees, and the DDR was a reference rate applied after trading closed, not a standalone market price. The HC held that traders who chose to retain their positions until expiry could not later insist on a floor price or seek annulment of the settlement, as that would contradict the agreed contract framework and prejudice counterparties. Judicial interference was also declined because the settlement had already been completed across numerous traders and could not be effectively unwound through writ directions.
Negative due date rate in cash-settled crude oil futures was upheld because the contract specifications tied settlement to the NYMEX front-month settlement price converted into rupees, and the DDR was a reference rate applied after trading closed, not a standalone market price. The HC held that traders who chose to retain their positions until expiry could not later insist on a floor price or seek annulment of the settlement, as that would contradict the agreed contract framework and prejudice counterparties. Judicial interference was also declined because the settlement had already been completed across numerous traders and could not be effectively unwound through writ directions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.