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...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
481 to 500 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC quashed an ex-parte demand order and show cause notice issued on 14.12.2023 for the financial year 2017-18 as time-barred under Section 73(10). Following the precedent in M/s Anita Traders, the court determined that due to notification extensions, the three-year limitation period for orders under Section 73(9) expired on 05.02.2023. The court rejected arguments that the deadline extended to 31.03.2023, finding the impugned orders issued well beyond the prescribed limitation period and therefore void for lack of jurisdiction. The petition was allowed, with the challenged orders declared ultra vires for exceeding statutory time limitations.
HC quashed an ex-parte demand order and show cause notice issued on 14.12.2023 for the financial year 2017-18 as time-barred under Section 73(10). Following the precedent in M/s Anita Traders, the court determined that due to notification extensions, the three-year limitation period for orders under Section 73(9) expired on 05.02.2023. The court rejected arguments that the deadline extended to 31.03.2023, finding the impugned orders issued well beyond the prescribed limitation period and therefore void for lack of jurisdiction. The petition was allowed, with the challenged orders declared ultra vires for exceeding statutory time limitations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.