Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
801 to 820 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court set aside the impugned order of adjudication and remitted the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The appeal was dismissed on the ground of time limitation. However, the Court held that if an appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay as barred by limitation, it is not considered an appeal in the eyes of law, and there would be no merger of the original order into the order of the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The mere dismissal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority on the ground of limitation does not preclude the High Court from exercising its jurisdiction. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
The High Court set aside the impugned order of adjudication and remitted the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The appeal was dismissed on the ground of time limitation. However, the Court held that if an appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay as barred by limitation, it is not considered an appeal in the eyes of law, and there would be no merger of the original order into the order of the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The mere dismissal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority on the ground of limitation does not preclude the High Court from exercising its jurisdiction. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.