Pre-existing disputes over outcome-based professional fees can bar Section 9 insolvency proceedings where contractual entitlement requires investigati...
Corresponding scheduled offences preserve money-laundering jurisdiction despite repeal of the central corruption provision where conduct remains cover...
Concurrent anticipatory-bail jurisdiction permits applications before either forum, while secured evidence may negate custodial interrogation in GST e...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 97618 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 144C requires a draft assessment order before a final assessment order is made against an eligible foreign company where a prejudicial variation is proposed. The draft-order procedure enables the taxpayer to accept the variation or seek directions from the Dispute Resolution Panel before finalisation. Non-compliance is a jurisdictional defect rather than a curable procedural irregularity, and vitiates the final assessment order. Applying this principle, the assessment order was set aside for failure to issue a draft order; the taxpayer's cross-objection succeeded and the Revenue's merits appeal became infructuous.
Section 144C requires a draft assessment order before a final assessment order is made against an eligible foreign company where a prejudicial variation is proposed. The draft-order procedure enables the taxpayer to accept the variation or seek directions from the Dispute Resolution Panel before finalisation. Non-compliance is a jurisdictional defect rather than a curable procedural irregularity, and vitiates the final assessment order. Applying this principle, the assessment order was set aside for failure to issue a draft order; the taxpayer's cross-objection succeeded and the Revenue's merits appeal became infructuous.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
