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 ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes. It set aside the CIT(A)'s dismissal of the rectification application and directed the CIT(A) to decide the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on merits as per Section 250(6) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s action of not interfering with the CPC's adjustment regarding GST/CENVAT refund on the ground of requiring verification of books of accounts was akin to "missing the woods for trees". The Tribunal emphasized that rules of procedure should promote justice, not obstruct it, relying on the Supreme Court's observation in MV Vali Perov. Fernandeo Lopez case.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes. It set aside the CIT(A)'s dismissal of the rectification application and directed the CIT(A) to decide the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on merits as per Section 250(6) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s action of not interfering with the CPC's adjustment regarding GST/CENVAT refund on the ground of requiring verification of books of accounts was akin to "missing the woods for trees". The Tribunal emphasized that rules of procedure should promote justice, not obstruct it, relying on the Supreme Court's observation in MV Vali Perov. Fernandeo Lopez case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.