Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Bogus LTCG - onus to prove - Penny stock purchases - Claim made u/s 10(38) denied - ITAT remanded the matter back - Where all the evidence had been produced and the CIT(A), after full investigation of the evidence and examination of the accounts, had given a definite finding on the question in issue, the Tribunal's order of remand was held to be invalid. Substantial questions of law framed are answered in favour of the Revenue - HC
Bogus LTCG - onus to prove - Penny stock purchases - Claim made u/s 10(38) denied - ITAT remanded the matter back - Where all the evidence had been produced and the CIT(A), after full investigation of the evidence and examination of the accounts, had given a definite finding on the question in issue, the Tribunal's order of remand was held to be invalid. Substantial questions of law framed are answered in favour of the Revenue - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.