Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
HC set aside the dismissal order regarding petitioner's appeal, which was initially rejected due to non-payment of mandatory pre-deposit. The court found procedural irregularities in the Appellate Authority's issuance of a common order for multiple appellants without establishing identity of cause of action or parties. While some appeals were partially allowed, the petitioner's case was dismissed solely on technical grounds of non-payment. Given petitioner's willingness to comply with payment requirements, HC granted relief conditional upon full pre-deposit payment within two weeks, enabling adjudication on merits.
HC set aside the dismissal order regarding petitioner's appeal, which was initially rejected due to non-payment of mandatory pre-deposit. The court found procedural irregularities in the Appellate Authority's issuance of a common order for multiple appellants without establishing identity of cause of action or parties. While some appeals were partially allowed, the petitioner's case was dismissed solely on technical grounds of non-payment. Given petitioner's willingness to comply with payment requirements, HC granted relief conditional upon full pre-deposit payment within two weeks, enabling adjudication on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.