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 ...
The HC quashed an ex-parte adjudication order requiring the petitioner-company to pay Rs. 2,20,75,208/- in tax, interest, and penalty under Section 73 of the KGST Act. Despite the petitioner's failure to respond to both the intimation dated 28.11.2023 and the show cause notice dated 08.12.2023, or to participate in the proceedings, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach. The matter was remanded to respondent No. 3, providing the petitioner one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice and contest the proceedings. The Court made no determination on the merits of the case, directing further proceedings in accordance with law.
The HC quashed an ex-parte adjudication order requiring the petitioner-company to pay Rs. 2,20,75,208/- in tax, interest, and penalty under Section 73 of the KGST Act. Despite the petitioner's failure to respond to both the intimation dated 28.11.2023 and the show cause notice dated 08.12.2023, or to participate in the proceedings, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach. The matter was remanded to respondent No. 3, providing the petitioner one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice and contest the proceedings. The Court made no determination on the merits of the case, directing further proceedings in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
