Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 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" ?
Validity of order passed by the ITSC - Settlement of a case - Bogus purchases and Accommodation entries - ITSC allowed certain amounts to be capitalized with depreciation - ITSC also granted immunity from penalties and prosecution - The High Court concluded that the ITSC acted within its powers in accepting the expenditure claims based on the documents seized during raids, which showed the cash generated from the bogus purchases was indeed used for stated capital expenditures. Regarding the deduction under Section 80IB(10), the High Court supported the ITSC’s decision, stating that the ITSC appropriately allowed the deduction after considering the ad hoc disallowances made in the previous years which impacted the project's profitability in the assessment year 2009-10. - The High Court dismissed the Revenue’s petition, upholding the ITSC’s order.
Validity of order passed by the ITSC - Settlement of a case - Bogus purchases and Accommodation entries - ITSC allowed certain amounts to be capitalized with depreciation - ITSC also granted immunity from penalties and prosecution - The High Court concluded that the ITSC acted within its powers in accepting the expenditure claims based on the documents seized during raids, which showed the cash generated from the bogus purchases was indeed used for stated capital expenditures. Regarding the deduction under Section 80IB(10), the High Court supported the ITSC’s decision, stating that the ITSC appropriately allowed the deduction after considering the ad hoc disallowances made in the previous years which impacted the project's profitability in the assessment year 2009-10. - The High Court dismissed the Revenue’s petition, upholding the ITSC’s order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
