Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The High Court considered the maintainability of a petition involving cheating, misappropriation of funds, and defrauding investors. The Court applied the Doctrine of Forum Conveniens and clarified that it can issue a writ under Article 226 when the cause of action arises within its territorial jurisdiction. Jurisdiction of High Courts is limited to the State(s) they cover. The Court noted that the respondent's main office being in Delhi does not confer jurisdiction. It highlighted that the petitioner could seek relief from the Karnataka High Court, where the respondent has a Regional Office. The Court cited a Supreme Court decision to support its decision to dismiss the petition due to lack of territorial jurisdiction.
The High Court considered the maintainability of a petition involving cheating, misappropriation of funds, and defrauding investors. The Court applied the Doctrine of Forum Conveniens and clarified that it can issue a writ under Article 226 when the cause of action arises within its territorial jurisdiction. Jurisdiction of High Courts is limited to the State(s) they cover. The Court noted that the respondent's main office being in Delhi does not confer jurisdiction. It highlighted that the petitioner could seek relief from the Karnataka High Court, where the respondent has a Regional Office. The Court cited a Supreme Court decision to support its decision to dismiss the petition due to lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
