Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
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.