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 ...
Refund claim rejected solely on non-compliance of time limit u/s 34(2) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Appellant authority noted facts, grounds, submissions but dismissed appeal without addressing misinterpretation of Section 34(2) raised by appellants. High Court quashed orders of authorities, remanded matter to consider refund application u/s 54 based on documents, undisputed TPL certificate, and pass order in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
Refund claim rejected solely on non-compliance of time limit u/s 34(2) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Appellant authority noted facts, grounds, submissions but dismissed appeal without addressing misinterpretation of Section 34(2) raised by appellants. High Court quashed orders of authorities, remanded matter to consider refund application u/s 54 based on documents, undisputed TPL certificate, and pass order in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
