Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Dismissal of an appeal by the petitioner against an assessment order. The dismissal was primarily due to the petitioner filing an online appeal without submitting a certified physical copy of the assessment order, instead providing a downloaded copy. The High Courts unanimously held that the amendment to Rule 108, effective from 26.12.2022, is procedural and retrospective, relying on Indian Potash Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner and Oaknorth (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India. The courts agreed that rejecting an appeal on hyper-technical grounds is untenable, especially when filed timely with a downloaded copy. Consequently, the impugned appellate order was set aside, the appeal restored to the appellate authority for a merit-based decision in accordance with the law.
Dismissal of an appeal by the petitioner against an assessment order. The dismissal was primarily due to the petitioner filing an online appeal without submitting a certified physical copy of the assessment order, instead providing a downloaded copy. The High Courts unanimously held that the amendment to Rule 108, effective from 26.12.2022, is procedural and retrospective, relying on Indian Potash Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner and Oaknorth (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India. The courts agreed that rejecting an appeal on hyper-technical grounds is untenable, especially when filed timely with a downloaded copy. Consequently, the impugned appellate order was set aside, the appeal restored to the appellate authority for a merit-based decision in accordance with the law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
