Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) has wide powers under Chapter XIX-A to examine and evaluate all aspects of an application for settlement, including calling for reports, directing further inquiries, and holistically examining matters beyond the disclosures made by the applicant. The essential ingredients for granting immunity u/s 245H are cooperation by the applicant in computing total income and full and true disclosure of income, which are the same prerequisites for computation u/s 245D(4). Once the ITSC finds these conditions satisfied, its order granting immunity cannot be questioned separately, as both provisions are premised on identical considerations. The ITSC's order has finality u/s 245I, and can only be reviewed on grounds provided in Chapter XIX-A. Interfering with the grant of immunity would amount to questioning the acceptance of the application itself, which cannot be done if the statutory conditions were found satisfied. The principle of severability cannot be invoked as the considerations for computation and immunity are not distinct.
The Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) has wide powers under Chapter XIX-A to examine and evaluate all aspects of an application for settlement, including calling for reports, directing further inquiries, and holistically examining matters beyond the disclosures made by the applicant. The essential ingredients for granting immunity u/s 245H are cooperation by the applicant in computing total income and full and true disclosure of income, which are the same prerequisites for computation u/s 245D(4). Once the ITSC finds these conditions satisfied, its order granting immunity cannot be questioned separately, as both provisions are premised on identical considerations. The ITSC's order has finality u/s 245I, and can only be reviewed on grounds provided in Chapter XIX-A. Interfering with the grant of immunity would amount to questioning the acceptance of the application itself, which cannot be done if the statutory conditions were found satisfied. The principle of severability cannot be invoked as the considerations for computation and immunity are not distinct.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.