Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Declination to accept the recommendation made by the Chief Commissioner of Persons with Disabilities by his order dated 06.04.2023 - seeking direction to the respondents to grant GST Concession Certificate to the petitioner so that petitioner can avail concessional rate of GST - The petitioner's contention that their application should be considered under the 2018 policy, as it was submitted before the amendment to the policy in 2019. - The High Cdourt observed that there were no restrictions regarding the length of the vehicle or the date of purchase under the 2018 policy. - The court found that the petitioner's application should have been considered under the 2018 policy, and the subsequent amendment to the policy did not affect the validity of their application.
Declination to accept the recommendation made by the Chief Commissioner of Persons with Disabilities by his order dated 06.04.2023 - seeking direction to the respondents to grant GST Concession Certificate to the petitioner so that petitioner can avail concessional rate of GST - The petitioner's contention that their application should be considered under the 2018 policy, as it was submitted before the amendment to the policy in 2019. - The High Cdourt observed that there were no restrictions regarding the length of the vehicle or the date of purchase under the 2018 policy. - The court found that the petitioner's application should have been considered under the 2018 policy, and the subsequent amendment to the policy did not affect the validity of their application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.