Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The Punjab and Haryana High Court addressed the legal right of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) to challenge auction proceedings of properties owned by the HUF. The court held that the HUF had the legal standing to challenge the auction, rejecting objections raised by auction purchasers. The court found the auction proceedings null and void due to a fictitious tax demand and invoked the principle of lis pendens. It ruled that no rights were created in favor of auction purchasers who proceeded with knowledge of pending legal proceedings. The court ordered restoration of the properties to the HUF, declaring any subsequent transfers void. Income Tax Authorities were directed to refund auction proceeds with interest and pay costs to the petitioner. The court emphasized the need for a new interpretation of auction laws, citing relevant Supreme Court precedents. The judgment rendered the assessment order and interest demand null and void.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court addressed the legal right of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) to challenge auction proceedings of properties owned by the HUF. The court held that the HUF had the legal standing to challenge the auction, rejecting objections raised by auction purchasers. The court found the auction proceedings null and void due to a fictitious tax demand and invoked the principle of lis pendens. It ruled that no rights were created in favor of auction purchasers who proceeded with knowledge of pending legal proceedings. The court ordered restoration of the properties to the HUF, declaring any subsequent transfers void. Income Tax Authorities were directed to refund auction proceeds with interest and pay costs to the petitioner. The court emphasized the need for a new interpretation of auction laws, citing relevant Supreme Court precedents. The judgment rendered the assessment order and interest demand null and void.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
