Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Ad hoc confirmation of one-fifth of an alleged unexplained investment in a flat was found arbitrary where the source of payments was supported by bank transfers, housing finance, accumulated savings from government service, family agricultural income, and the spouse's income; that addition was deleted. The separate addition for the difference between stamp duty value and purchase price was also deleted because the order gave no cogent reason for refusing a valuation reference, relied on the wrong charging provision for the relevant assessment year, and ignored evidence showing demolition action for unauthorised construction, which supported the declared price as the flat's fair market value.
Ad hoc confirmation of one-fifth of an alleged unexplained investment in a flat was found arbitrary where the source of payments was supported by bank transfers, housing finance, accumulated savings from government service, family agricultural income, and the spouse's income; that addition was deleted. The separate addition for the difference between stamp duty value and purchase price was also deleted because the order gave no cogent reason for refusing a valuation reference, relied on the wrong charging provision for the relevant assessment year, and ignored evidence showing demolition action for unauthorised construction, which supported the declared price as the flat's fair market value.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
