Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95633 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Rectification of mistake u/s 254 - Depreciation on the non-compete fee denied - CIT(A) allowed the claim - ITAT rejected the claim - Whether AO has accepted the claim of the assessee - the words “similar business or commercial rights” have to necessarily result in an intangible asset against the entire world which can be asserted as such to qualify for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) - Merely because another appeal raising similar questions has been admitted by this Court, also does not persuade us to admit the present appeal as well only on this ground. - HC
Rectification of mistake u/s 254 - Depreciation on the non-compete fee denied - CIT(A) allowed the claim - ITAT rejected the claim - Whether AO has accepted the claim of the assessee - the words “similar business or commercial rights” have to necessarily result in an intangible asset against the entire world which can be asserted as such to qualify for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) - Merely because another appeal raising similar questions has been admitted by this Court, also does not persuade us to admit the present appeal as well only on this ground. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.