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...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Interest on refundable revenue deposits, including unspent Personal Ledger Account balances, is payable from the date of deposit where amounts were deposited during investigation before any duty liability was determined and therefore retained the character of revenue deposits. The majority view rejected the Revenue's challenge to interest from the deposit date and dismissed both appeals. The discussion distinguishes statutory and equitable interest and rejects blanket awards of 12% interest based solely on Sandvik, requiring consideration of relevant factors and later Supreme Court guidance. The majority treated the jurisdictional High Court ruling in Parle Agro as governing the entitlement to interest from the deposit date.
Interest on refundable revenue deposits, including unspent Personal Ledger Account balances, is payable from the date of deposit where amounts were deposited during investigation before any duty liability was determined and therefore retained the character of revenue deposits. The majority view rejected the Revenue's challenge to interest from the deposit date and dismissed both appeals. The discussion distinguishes statutory and equitable interest and rejects blanket awards of 12% interest based solely on Sandvik, requiring consideration of relevant factors and later Supreme Court guidance. The majority treated the jurisdictional High Court ruling in Parle Agro as governing the entitlement to interest from the deposit date.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
