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...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1001 to 1020 of 95833 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 validity of reopening an assessment based on excess funds not being part of an "approved refund" and thus subject to taxation. The Court noted that the approval to hold the fund was withdrawn only from the date of the order, not before. The Tribunal found that the withdrawal of approval would only take effect from the date of the order, not earlier. Therefore, the notice issued for reopening the assessment was deemed invalid as the approval was still in effect at the time. The Tribunal rightly set aside the notice and subsequent reassessment order due to the lack of communication regarding the withdrawal of approval by the Commissioner.
The High Court considered the validity of reopening an assessment based on excess funds not being part of an "approved refund" and thus subject to taxation. The Court noted that the approval to hold the fund was withdrawn only from the date of the order, not before. The Tribunal found that the withdrawal of approval would only take effect from the date of the order, not earlier. Therefore, the notice issued for reopening the assessment was deemed invalid as the approval was still in effect at the time. The Tribunal rightly set aside the notice and subsequent reassessment order due to the lack of communication regarding the withdrawal of approval by the Commissioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.