Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
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 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
