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 ...
HC held that Sections 269-UN and 293 of Income Tax Act, 1961 do not bar civil court jurisdiction in the present suit. The court found no impediment to plaintiffs seeking declaration of property re-vestment, as the suit does not challenge or modify any income tax order. The single judge's earlier order was set aside, with the suit restored for expedited hearing. The court ruled against revenue authorities, determining that the statutory provisions do not prevent judicial review of the specific legal claim. No costs were awarded, and the original proceedings shall continue until final disposal.
HC held that Sections 269-UN and 293 of Income Tax Act, 1961 do not bar civil court jurisdiction in the present suit. The court found no impediment to plaintiffs seeking declaration of property re-vestment, as the suit does not challenge or modify any income tax order. The single judge's earlier order was set aside, with the suit restored for expedited hearing. The court ruled against revenue authorities, determining that the statutory provisions do not prevent judicial review of the specific legal claim. No costs were awarded, and the original proceedings shall continue until final disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
