Infrastructure-development deduction remains available to EPC contractors when substantive statutory conditions outweigh contractor labels in agreemen...
Explained Investment Sources: documented gifts and traceable salary savings supported deletion of additions for property and mutual-fund SIP investmen...
Internal comparable pricing supports arm's-length interest on compulsorily convertible debentures, preventing their recharacterisation as equity for t...
Nominee director protection shields independent financial-institution appointees from criminal liability where they lack involvement in deposit defaul...
The High Court considered a case regarding refund of Input Tax Credit. The petitioner's refund application was rejected due to lack of supporting documents. The petitioner argued that due to portal closure, they couldn't rectify the deficiencies or file a fresh application. The court emphasized that procedural rules should facilitate justice, not deny legitimate claims. The court allowed the petitioner to manually submit a refund application within two weeks, addressing the deficiencies mentioned in the deficiency memo.
The High Court considered a case regarding refund of Input Tax Credit. The petitioner's refund application was rejected due to lack of supporting documents. The petitioner argued that due to portal closure, they couldn't rectify the deficiencies or file a fresh application. The court emphasized that procedural rules should facilitate justice, not deny legitimate claims. The court allowed the petitioner to manually submit a refund application within two weeks, addressing the deficiencies mentioned in the deficiency memo.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
