Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
