Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The High Court considered a challenge to letters issued by the Deputy Commissioner under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme due to the Petitioner's failure to make payment as per the SVLDRS-3 form. The Court found that the Petitioner's inability to make payment was due to a technical glitch, which was raised with the Respondents. The Petitioner expressed willingness to pay, and as no fault was attributed to them, they should not be denied the SVLDRS benefit. The Court referenced a previous decision where a similar situation allowed the declarant to make payment and benefit from the SVLDR scheme. The application was disposed of in favor of the Petitioner.
The High Court considered a challenge to letters issued by the Deputy Commissioner under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme due to the Petitioner's failure to make payment as per the SVLDRS-3 form. The Court found that the Petitioner's inability to make payment was due to a technical glitch, which was raised with the Respondents. The Petitioner expressed willingness to pay, and as no fault was attributed to them, they should not be denied the SVLDRS benefit. The Court referenced a previous decision where a similar situation allowed the declarant to make payment and benefit from the SVLDR scheme. The application was disposed of in favor of the Petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.