Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
The High Court quashed the assessment order passed u/s 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B, as well as the consequential notices u/ss 156 and 274 read with 271AA(1) of the Income Tax Act. The court held that the petitioner had complied with the requirements of the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (IDS) by making a declaration and depositing the appropriate tax amount. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to the benefits under the IDS. The court directed the respondents to issue an appropriate certificate of tax deposit under the IDS to the petitioner within four weeks.
The High Court quashed the assessment order passed u/s 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B, as well as the consequential notices u/ss 156 and 274 read with 271AA(1) of the Income Tax Act. The court held that the petitioner had complied with the requirements of the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (IDS) by making a declaration and depositing the appropriate tax amount. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to the benefits under the IDS. The court directed the respondents to issue an appropriate certificate of tax deposit under the IDS to the petitioner within four weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.