Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Revisional jurisdiction u/s 264 - Application u/s 264 rejected as intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act is not an order amenable to revisional jurisdiction u/s 264 - The court ruled that intimation under Section 143(1) is amenable to revisional jurisdiction under Section 264 of the Act. This was based on precedent in "Diwaker Tripathi v. Principal Commissioner of Income tax – 17 & Ors.", which allowed for such revision.
Revisional jurisdiction u/s 264 - Application u/s 264 rejected as intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act is not an order amenable to revisional jurisdiction u/s 264 - The court ruled that intimation under Section 143(1) is amenable to revisional jurisdiction under Section 264 of the Act. This was based on precedent in "Diwaker Tripathi v. Principal Commissioner of Income tax – 17 & Ors.", which allowed for such revision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
