Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 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 respondents were permitted to proceed against the petitioner under the provisions of the Act, including invoking powers u/s 74, following the court's modification order granting liberty to consider the matter beyond Section 73. The challenge to the notice issued u/s 74 alleging fraud or suppression of facts cannot be assailed. The determination of whether suppression of facts warranting invocation of Section 74 occurred is a factual issue, and the authority has jurisdiction to issue a notice under that section. The writ court should not intervene at this stage when the petitioner is merely asked to show cause against the proposed action. The petition is disposed of.
The respondents were permitted to proceed against the petitioner under the provisions of the Act, including invoking powers u/s 74, following the court's modification order granting liberty to consider the matter beyond Section 73. The challenge to the notice issued u/s 74 alleging fraud or suppression of facts cannot be assailed. The determination of whether suppression of facts warranting invocation of Section 74 occurred is a factual issue, and the authority has jurisdiction to issue a notice under that section. The writ court should not intervene at this stage when the petitioner is merely asked to show cause against the proposed action. The petition is disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
