Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The petitioner is entitled to carry forward the reduced Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) Credit for payment of taxes under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas (DTVSV) Scheme. The respondent, while calculating the amount payable in Form 3 regarding tax arrears and amount payable under DTVSV, failed to consider the Assessing Officer's order permitting the petitioner to carry forward the MAT Credit. The High Court quashed Form 3 and the rectification order, remanding the matter to the respondent to recalculate the entitlement of refund in accordance with the Scheme and Rules, applying Rule 10, and considering the Assessing Officer's order u/s 154 giving effect to the CIT(A) order regarding the MAT Credit carry forward.
The petitioner is entitled to carry forward the reduced Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) Credit for payment of taxes under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas (DTVSV) Scheme. The respondent, while calculating the amount payable in Form 3 regarding tax arrears and amount payable under DTVSV, failed to consider the Assessing Officer's order permitting the petitioner to carry forward the MAT Credit. The High Court quashed Form 3 and the rectification order, remanding the matter to the respondent to recalculate the entitlement of refund in accordance with the Scheme and Rules, applying Rule 10, and considering the Assessing Officer's order u/s 154 giving effect to the CIT(A) order regarding the MAT Credit carry forward.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
