Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund claim of encashed amount by the revenue - Direction to withdraw recovery proceedings by issuing a demand draft equivalent to the Bank Guarantee - circular dated 18.03.2020 - The Court notes the submissions of both parties regarding the inability to prefer an appeal due to the non-constitution of the appellate tribunal. - Referring to a circular, the Court acknowledges the issue of pending appellate processes due to the absence of the appellate tribunal. The Court directs the respondent to refund the encashed amount to the petitioner within one month from the date of the judgment. It further directs the petitioner to furnish a fresh bank guarantee within one week from the date of refund, valid for one year.
Refund claim of encashed amount by the revenue - Direction to withdraw recovery proceedings by issuing a demand draft equivalent to the Bank Guarantee - circular dated 18.03.2020 - The Court notes the submissions of both parties regarding the inability to prefer an appeal due to the non-constitution of the appellate tribunal. - Referring to a circular, the Court acknowledges the issue of pending appellate processes due to the absence of the appellate tribunal. The Court directs the respondent to refund the encashed amount to the petitioner within one month from the date of the judgment. It further directs the petitioner to furnish a fresh bank guarantee within one week from the date of refund, valid for one year.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.