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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 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" ?
Section 35D(2)(c) was held to allow deduction only to a company for expenditure connected with public subscription of its shares or debentures. The Tribunal applied strict construction and refused to extend that relief to a REIT constituted as a trust, since a business trust is neither a company nor deemed to be one under the Act. It further held that REIT units are legally distinct from shares or debentures, and their regulatory treatment under SEBI norms does not change that character for section 35D(2)(c). The disallowance of the public issue expense claim was therefore sustained.
Section 35D(2)(c) was held to allow deduction only to a company for expenditure connected with public subscription of its shares or debentures. The Tribunal applied strict construction and refused to extend that relief to a REIT constituted as a trust, since a business trust is neither a company nor deemed to be one under the Act. It further held that REIT units are legally distinct from shares or debentures, and their regulatory treatment under SEBI norms does not change that character for section 35D(2)(c). The disallowance of the public issue expense claim was therefore sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.