Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
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.