Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
SC addressed maintainability of writ petitions under Article 226 against MSEFC orders under MSMED Act 2006. The Court determined that while MSMED Act establishes mandatory statutory arbitration with specific provisions for interest rates and pre-deposits, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 remains a constitutional right and part of basic structure. The matter raised complex questions regarding absolute bar on writ jurisdiction, exceptions to alternative remedy doctrine, and propriety of MSEFC members serving as both conciliators and arbitrators. Due to significance, SC referred these questions to a five-judge bench, maintaining that writ jurisdiction is discretionary and not automatically barred by alternative remedies. Final determination pending larger bench consideration.
SC addressed maintainability of writ petitions under Article 226 against MSEFC orders under MSMED Act 2006. The Court determined that while MSMED Act establishes mandatory statutory arbitration with specific provisions for interest rates and pre-deposits, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 remains a constitutional right and part of basic structure. The matter raised complex questions regarding absolute bar on writ jurisdiction, exceptions to alternative remedy doctrine, and propriety of MSEFC members serving as both conciliators and arbitrators. Due to significance, SC referred these questions to a five-judge bench, maintaining that writ jurisdiction is discretionary and not automatically barred by alternative remedies. Final determination pending larger bench consideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
