Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Clause 43.2 requires contract-price adjustment where taxes, duties or levies change during contract execution and the change is not already reflected in the price. Accordingly, GST introduced during subsisting works contracts shifted the additional tax burden to the employer, supported by the contractual terms and the applicable Government Order, and the tax component was directed to be reimbursed. Retention amounts could not be withheld merely because audit objections remained pending; they were to be refunded with commercial-rate interest unless appropriation was otherwise justified. Claims for price escalation or adjustment involving disputed facts were not determined in writ proceedings and were left to the contractual dispute-resolution mechanism and other remedies.
Clause 43.2 requires contract-price adjustment where taxes, duties or levies change during contract execution and the change is not already reflected in the price. Accordingly, GST introduced during subsisting works contracts shifted the additional tax burden to the employer, supported by the contractual terms and the applicable Government Order, and the tax component was directed to be reimbursed. Retention amounts could not be withheld merely because audit objections remained pending; they were to be refunded with commercial-rate interest unless appropriation was otherwise justified. Claims for price escalation or adjustment involving disputed facts were not determined in writ proceedings and were left to the contractual dispute-resolution mechanism and other remedies.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.