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...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1461 to 1480 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Collateral challenge to a CGST adjudication order through an interlocutory application in a pending writ petition was not maintainable because the earlier AGST notice challenge had no connection with the subsequent CGST proceedings. No interim restraint covered the adjudication, and no jurisdictional error by the Proper Officer was established; the writ challenge became infructuous and the interlocutory challenge was misconceived. Bona fide and diligent pursuit of the wrong writ remedy justified allowing recourse to the statutory appellate remedy despite expiry of limitation. Petitioners received liberty to file an appeal under the CGST Act within 30 days, to be considered on merits without limitation objection; prior interim protection was vacated.
Collateral challenge to a CGST adjudication order through an interlocutory application in a pending writ petition was not maintainable because the earlier AGST notice challenge had no connection with the subsequent CGST proceedings. No interim restraint covered the adjudication, and no jurisdictional error by the Proper Officer was established; the writ challenge became infructuous and the interlocutory challenge was misconceived. Bona fide and diligent pursuit of the wrong writ remedy justified allowing recourse to the statutory appellate remedy despite expiry of limitation. Petitioners received liberty to file an appeal under the CGST Act within 30 days, to be considered on merits without limitation objection; prior interim protection was vacated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.