Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A partnership firm's crystallised tax dues may be recovered by issuing a garnishee notice against a partner's bank account when the recovery is directed under Section 79(1)(c)(i), not Section 83. The challenge failed because the impugned communication was on its face a recovery step after liability had crystallised, the demand against the firm itself had not been challenged, and partners are personally liable for the firm's dues. On those facts, no infirmity was found in the notice to the bank, and writ interference was unwarranted.
A partnership firm's crystallised tax dues may be recovered by issuing a garnishee notice against a partner's bank account when the recovery is directed under Section 79(1)(c)(i), not Section 83. The challenge failed because the impugned communication was on its face a recovery step after liability had crystallised, the demand against the firm itself had not been challenged, and partners are personally liable for the firm's dues. On those facts, no infirmity was found in the notice to the bank, and writ interference was unwarranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
