Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return filing...
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...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95833 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 directed the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to amend the shipping bills u/s 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, and process the claim for the Merchandise Exports From India Scheme (MEIS) benefit. The court held that when the substantive conditions are satisfied, the benefit cannot be denied due to a technical error or lacunae in the electronic system. The petitioner's non-declaration of intent to avail the MEIS benefit on the shipping bills was a curable defect, and the authorities were unjustified in denying the MEIS benefit. The petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
The High Court directed the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to amend the shipping bills u/s 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, and process the claim for the Merchandise Exports From India Scheme (MEIS) benefit. The court held that when the substantive conditions are satisfied, the benefit cannot be denied due to a technical error or lacunae in the electronic system. The petitioner's non-declaration of intent to avail the MEIS benefit on the shipping bills was a curable defect, and the authorities were unjustified in denying the MEIS benefit. The petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.