Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
SC rejected the interim application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963, declining to condone 301 days delay in filing commercial appeal. The Court emphasized the Commercial Courts Act's objective of expediting commercial litigation and strict adherence to statutory timelines. The petitioner's failure to procure certified copies within prescribed limitation period and subsequent 300-day inaction was deemed negligent. The limitation period commenced from judgment pronouncement, irrespective of certified copy provision. The Court underscored that parties cannot evade procedural responsibilities, and such interpretation would undermine limitation principles and the Act's purpose of ensuring timely case disposal. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, upholding the lower court's rejection of delay condonation.
SC rejected the interim application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963, declining to condone 301 days delay in filing commercial appeal. The Court emphasized the Commercial Courts Act's objective of expediting commercial litigation and strict adherence to statutory timelines. The petitioner's failure to procure certified copies within prescribed limitation period and subsequent 300-day inaction was deemed negligent. The limitation period commenced from judgment pronouncement, irrespective of certified copy provision. The Court underscored that parties cannot evade procedural responsibilities, and such interpretation would undermine limitation principles and the Act's purpose of ensuring timely case disposal. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, upholding the lower court's rejection of delay condonation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
