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 ...
Sanction of composite scheme of amalgamation - The appellants contested the order, arguing that it failed to consider certain clauses of the scheme, particularly regarding separability. They sought approval for part D of the scheme, excluding parts B and C, which had been automatically revoked due to non-approval by relevant shareholders. - The Tribunal examined the issues raised and found that the impugned order did not adequately address the separability of the scheme. It recognized the appellants' argument for separability and the Tribunal's discretion to modify arrangements for proper implementation. - Consequently the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the NCLT to reconsider the application for the second motion, taking into account the observations made.
Sanction of composite scheme of amalgamation - The appellants contested the order, arguing that it failed to consider certain clauses of the scheme, particularly regarding separability. They sought approval for part D of the scheme, excluding parts B and C, which had been automatically revoked due to non-approval by relevant shareholders. - The Tribunal examined the issues raised and found that the impugned order did not adequately address the separability of the scheme. It recognized the appellants' argument for separability and the Tribunal's discretion to modify arrangements for proper implementation. - Consequently the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the NCLT to reconsider the application for the second motion, taking into account the observations made.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.