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...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Jurisdiction - power to adjudicate SCN - The High Court rejected the contention that the previous involvement of a Commissioner of Customs in the case's proceedings biased the adjudication process. It held that the competence and authority of the officer who issued the Show Cause Notice were not affected by the Commissioner's involvement. The Court noted the legal provisions empowering certain officers to authorize arrests and issue Show Cause Notices. It also acknowledged a notification specifying procedures for representation before the High Court but concluded that the involvement of a Commissioner of Customs did not affect the authority of the adjudicating officer.
Jurisdiction - power to adjudicate SCN - The High Court rejected the contention that the previous involvement of a Commissioner of Customs in the case's proceedings biased the adjudication process. It held that the competence and authority of the officer who issued the Show Cause Notice were not affected by the Commissioner's involvement. The Court noted the legal provisions empowering certain officers to authorize arrests and issue Show Cause Notices. It also acknowledged a notification specifying procedures for representation before the High Court but concluded that the involvement of a Commissioner of Customs did not affect the authority of the adjudicating officer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
