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 ...
SC held that Respondent No. 1 breached multiple contractual obligations in the allotment agreement, including failure to secure statutory approvals and execute sub-lease documents. The court ordered Respondent No. 1 to refund Rs. 28,11,31,939 to the Appellant. However, due to the Appellant's questionable conduct and violation of the "clean hands" doctrine, the court denied any additional interest on the refunded amount. The impugned High Court judgment was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of, with Respondent No. 1 directed to refund the first installment without interest.
SC held that Respondent No. 1 breached multiple contractual obligations in the allotment agreement, including failure to secure statutory approvals and execute sub-lease documents. The court ordered Respondent No. 1 to refund Rs. 28,11,31,939 to the Appellant. However, due to the Appellant's questionable conduct and violation of the "clean hands" doctrine, the court denied any additional interest on the refunded amount. The impugned High Court judgment was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of, with Respondent No. 1 directed to refund the first installment without interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
