Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
The petitioners challenged the attachment of their bank account and steps taken by the respondents pursuant to an order of rectification, alleging irregular recovery before the expiry of the appeal filing period. The court held that since the petitioners had not filed an appeal against the order u/s 73, they cannot invoke extraordinary writ jurisdiction when an efficacious alternate remedy is available. The petitioners were permitted to approach the appellate authority within 15 days, and the authority was directed to condone the delay and hear the appeal within 8 weeks. If the appeal is filed within the prescribed time and 10% of the disputed tax has been recovered or deposited, the orders challenged before the appellate authority shall be deemed stayed, and the order attaching the petitioners' bank account shall not be given further effect. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
The petitioners challenged the attachment of their bank account and steps taken by the respondents pursuant to an order of rectification, alleging irregular recovery before the expiry of the appeal filing period. The court held that since the petitioners had not filed an appeal against the order u/s 73, they cannot invoke extraordinary writ jurisdiction when an efficacious alternate remedy is available. The petitioners were permitted to approach the appellate authority within 15 days, and the authority was directed to condone the delay and hear the appeal within 8 weeks. If the appeal is filed within the prescribed time and 10% of the disputed tax has been recovered or deposited, the orders challenged before the appellate authority shall be deemed stayed, and the order attaching the petitioners' bank account shall not be given further effect. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.