COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Validity of order passed u/s. 143(3) read with section 144C(13) - the final order should have been passed on or before 30.11.2014, but the same has been passed on 30.01.2015, which is clearly beyond the period of limitation as prescribed u/s. 144C - the order is s bad in law ab initio - AT
Validity of order passed u/s. 143(3) read with section 144C(13) - the final order should have been passed on or before 30.11.2014, but the same has been passed on 30.01.2015, which is clearly beyond the period of limitation as prescribed u/s. 144C - the order is s bad in law ab initio - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.