Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
961 to 980 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Method of communication of notice - The High Court examined the provisions of Section 282(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rule 127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 regarding the method and manner of service of notice. - The Court concluded that communication of notice electronically should adhere strictly to the prescribed methods and does not include presumptive notification by placing it on the e-portal. - The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, stating that they were not given a fair opportunity to respond to the proceedings under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act of 1961.
Method of communication of notice - The High Court examined the provisions of Section 282(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rule 127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 regarding the method and manner of service of notice. - The Court concluded that communication of notice electronically should adhere strictly to the prescribed methods and does not include presumptive notification by placing it on the e-portal. - The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, stating that they were not given a fair opportunity to respond to the proceedings under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act of 1961.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.