Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The High Court held that the Interim Board for Settlement erred in rejecting the petitioner's settlement application for the relevant assessment years based on the condition in the CBDT notification that the assessee should be eligible on January 21, 2021. The court relied on its previous decision in Sar Senapati Santaji Ghorpade Sugar Factory Ltd., which quashed the said condition as ultra vires Section 119. Following this precedent and its recent decision in M/s. Vishwakarma Developers, the court allowed the present proceedings and quashed the orders passed by the Interim Settlement Board rejecting the petitioner's application.
The High Court held that the Interim Board for Settlement erred in rejecting the petitioner's settlement application for the relevant assessment years based on the condition in the CBDT notification that the assessee should be eligible on January 21, 2021. The court relied on its previous decision in Sar Senapati Santaji Ghorpade Sugar Factory Ltd., which quashed the said condition as ultra vires Section 119. Following this precedent and its recent decision in M/s. Vishwakarma Developers, the court allowed the present proceedings and quashed the orders passed by the Interim Settlement Board rejecting the petitioner's application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
