Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
The writ petition challenging notices u/ss 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, including alleged arbitrary action for non-compliance with a letter of arrangement dated June 28, 2021, was filed after issuance of the Section 13(4) notice. The Supreme Court in Phoenix ARC held that writ petitions against proposed action u/s 13(4) are an abuse of process due to the efficacious statutory remedy of appeal u/s 17. The Supreme Court in Baghora Polylab held that a contract may be discharged by parties entering into a new contract or accepting modified obligations. Here, the respondent executed documents per the November 11, 2021 letter of arrangement, constituting a new contract substituting the original June 28, 2021 restructuring letter. Thus, the cause of action for specific performance of the June 28 letter no longer survives after accepting the November 11 letter. The High Court's direction to give effect to the June 28 letter was set aside.
The writ petition challenging notices u/ss 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, including alleged arbitrary action for non-compliance with a letter of arrangement dated June 28, 2021, was filed after issuance of the Section 13(4) notice. The Supreme Court in Phoenix ARC held that writ petitions against proposed action u/s 13(4) are an abuse of process due to the efficacious statutory remedy of appeal u/s 17. The Supreme Court in Baghora Polylab held that a contract may be discharged by parties entering into a new contract or accepting modified obligations. Here, the respondent executed documents per the November 11, 2021 letter of arrangement, constituting a new contract substituting the original June 28, 2021 restructuring letter. Thus, the cause of action for specific performance of the June 28 letter no longer survives after accepting the November 11 letter. The High Court's direction to give effect to the June 28 letter was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
