Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction for possession of the suit property and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing or interfering with the plaintiff's possession. The court held that the late Sardar Nirmal Singh occupied the property as a licensee, and allowing his family to claim ownership would be an abuse of the Benami Act. The court found no fiduciary relationship between the late Raghbir Singh and Sardar Nirmal Singh regarding the property. The suit lacked cause of action, and the ownership claim was barred u/s 4 of the Benami Act. The amendment application relying on Pankaja judgment was misplaced. The suit was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(a) and 11(d) of CPC. The court issued a mandatory injunction directing the plaintiff to hand over vacant possession to defendant no. 1 within four weeks, considering the plaintiff's illegal and unauthorized possession. Mesne profits were awarded from 01.05.2022 for continued illegal possession. The plaintiff's reliefs were dismissed, and actual costs were imposed for abuse of process u/s 35(2) CPC and Delhi High Court Rules, as per Ramrameshwari Devi judgment.
The plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction for possession of the suit property and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing or interfering with the plaintiff's possession. The court held that the late Sardar Nirmal Singh occupied the property as a licensee, and allowing his family to claim ownership would be an abuse of the Benami Act. The court found no fiduciary relationship between the late Raghbir Singh and Sardar Nirmal Singh regarding the property. The suit lacked cause of action, and the ownership claim was barred u/s 4 of the Benami Act. The amendment application relying on Pankaja judgment was misplaced. The suit was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(a) and 11(d) of CPC. The court issued a mandatory injunction directing the plaintiff to hand over vacant possession to defendant no. 1 within four weeks, considering the plaintiff's illegal and unauthorized possession. Mesne profits were awarded from 01.05.2022 for continued illegal possession. The plaintiff's reliefs were dismissed, and actual costs were imposed for abuse of process u/s 35(2) CPC and Delhi High Court Rules, as per Ramrameshwari Devi judgment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
