Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Validity of Settlement Commission orders - The case involved petitions seeking directives for the issuance of formal orders under section 245D (4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, reflecting settlement terms pronounced by the Settlement Commission. While petitioners asserted the settlement's conclusion, respondent No. 2 contested, citing discrepancies in official records. - Upon review, the High Court found the affidavit of the Vice President and Member of the Settlement Commission to be conclusive evidence of settlement. Despite respondent No. 2's objections, the High Court directed the Interim Board to issue the requested orders, ensuring the proper administration of justice.
Validity of Settlement Commission orders - The case involved petitions seeking directives for the issuance of formal orders under section 245D (4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, reflecting settlement terms pronounced by the Settlement Commission. While petitioners asserted the settlement's conclusion, respondent No. 2 contested, citing discrepancies in official records. - Upon review, the High Court found the affidavit of the Vice President and Member of the Settlement Commission to be conclusive evidence of settlement. Despite respondent No. 2's objections, the High Court directed the Interim Board to issue the requested orders, ensuring the proper administration of justice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.