Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
HC allowed the writ petition, setting aside the respondent's order rejecting the petitioner's application to rectify Form-3 under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The court interpreted Sections 2(j), 2(o), and 3 of the Act, determining that the petitioner is liable to pay only half the calculated tax amount. The court also clarified that if the petitioner had paid excess tax under the Income Tax Act, 1961, they would be entitled to a refund without interest, subject to the provisions of Section 7 of the Act.
HC allowed the writ petition, setting aside the respondent's order rejecting the petitioner's application to rectify Form-3 under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The court interpreted Sections 2(j), 2(o), and 3 of the Act, determining that the petitioner is liable to pay only half the calculated tax amount. The court also clarified that if the petitioner had paid excess tax under the Income Tax Act, 1961, they would be entitled to a refund without interest, subject to the provisions of Section 7 of the Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
