Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court considered the maintainability of a review petition based on a subsequent judgment and the condonation of a 619-day delay in filing the civil review petition. The appellant attributed the delay to the Counsel's actions. The main issue was the entitlement of exemption u/s 80-P(2)(a)(i) and the taxability of transfer charges received by the Samiti. The Court referred to a Supreme Court decision regarding the nature of transfer charges. The Court held that a decision based on a question of law, if subsequently reversed or modified by a superior court, does not form grounds for review. The Court noted a split verdict in another Supreme Court case. The Court emphasized that entertaining a review petition ignoring statutory provisions would create uncertainty. Consequently, the appeal for condonation of the delay in filing the civil review petition was dismissed.
The High Court considered the maintainability of a review petition based on a subsequent judgment and the condonation of a 619-day delay in filing the civil review petition. The appellant attributed the delay to the Counsel's actions. The main issue was the entitlement of exemption u/s 80-P(2)(a)(i) and the taxability of transfer charges received by the Samiti. The Court referred to a Supreme Court decision regarding the nature of transfer charges. The Court held that a decision based on a question of law, if subsequently reversed or modified by a superior court, does not form grounds for review. The Court noted a split verdict in another Supreme Court case. The Court emphasized that entertaining a review petition ignoring statutory provisions would create uncertainty. Consequently, the appeal for condonation of the delay in filing the civil review petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
