Business expenditure and depreciation rules allow operational outgoings while limiting disallowances for personal elements and unsupported third-party...
Compromise-and-arrangement extensions may accommodate debt assignment where creditor commercial judgment supports value maximisation and avoids proced...
Delayed-payment surcharge is not taxable tolerance consideration where it penalises default, while meter testing follows electricity distribution trea...
Sufficient cause for delayed revenue income-tax appeals requires bona fides, due diligence and a credible explanation; otherwise limitation bars appea...
Inverted-duty-structure refunds remain available for unchanged-rate apparel supplies despite trader status and require tax-period-specific computation...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
781 to 800 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" ?
Questions of law proposed in an appeal from a Tribunal's...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengeable.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Questions of law proposed in an appeal from a Tribunal's miscellaneous-application order must arise from that order, rather than from an unaltered finding in the original appellate order. Where the miscellaneous order only modified the terms of remand and left intact the finding that an accepted sale-and-purchase software transaction subject to arm's length price determination did not give rise to a dependent agent permanent establishment issue, challenges to that finding fell outside the appeal's scope. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, while its right to challenge the original Tribunal order in accordance with law remained open.
Questions of law proposed in an appeal from a Tribunal's miscellaneous-application order must arise from that order, rather than from an unaltered finding in the original appellate order. Where the miscellaneous order only modified the terms of remand and left intact the finding that an accepted sale-and-purchase software transaction subject to arm's length price determination did not give rise to a dependent agent permanent establishment issue, challenges to that finding fell outside the appeal's scope. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, while its right to challenge the original Tribunal order in accordance with law remained open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.