Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Section 264(4) does not bar revision merely because the statutory period for filing an appeal has expired. Where no appeal or condonation application is pending and waiver of appeal is not relevant, the Revisional Authority should entertain the revision on merits. Refusal on the premise that the revision is non-maintainable is erroneous, and merits observations founded on that premise cannot stand. The rejection was set aside, with the revision restored for fresh adjudication on merits; all substantive contentions remain open.
Section 264(4) does not bar revision merely because the statutory period for filing an appeal has expired. Where no appeal or condonation application is pending and waiver of appeal is not relevant, the Revisional Authority should entertain the revision on merits. Refusal on the premise that the revision is non-maintainable is erroneous, and merits observations founded on that premise cannot stand. The rejection was set aside, with the revision restored for fresh adjudication on merits; all substantive contentions remain open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.