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...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
On a conjoint reading of the conveyance deed and consent terms, the assessee was found to have relinquished all rights, title, interest and possession in the entire larger land, so the consideration was treated as a global settlement for extinguishment of the whole bundle of rights. The Tribunal held that the assessee's development and possessory rights were themselves a capital asset, and their extinguishment amounted to a transfer. As the indexed cost claimed related to those intangible rights, not to ownership of the physical land, restriction of cost by reference only to the portion conveyed was unsustainable. The deletion of the addition was upheld.
On a conjoint reading of the conveyance deed and consent terms, the assessee was found to have relinquished all rights, title, interest and possession in the entire larger land, so the consideration was treated as a global settlement for extinguishment of the whole bundle of rights. The Tribunal held that the assessee's development and possessory rights were themselves a capital asset, and their extinguishment amounted to a transfer. As the indexed cost claimed related to those intangible rights, not to ownership of the physical land, restriction of cost by reference only to the portion conveyed was unsustainable. The deletion of the addition was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.