Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC rejected a second appeal filed by grandchildren seeking partition and cancellation of sale deed of their grandfather's property inherited by their father post-1956. The court held that property inherited after commencement of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 constitutes self-acquired property of heirs, not ancestral or coparcenary property. Grandchildren possess no vested rights by birth in such property. The court emphasized that coparcenary property can only be created from pre-1956 ancestral property or through deliberate blending with existing coparcenary assets. Absent proper pleadings establishing joint family character, no presumption exists that property belongs to HUF. The suit disclosed no cause of action as succession was governed by Section 8 of the 1956 Act, and the main relief seeking cancellation was time-barred, rendering consequential reliefs equally barred.
The HC rejected a second appeal filed by grandchildren seeking partition and cancellation of sale deed of their grandfather's property inherited by their father post-1956. The court held that property inherited after commencement of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 constitutes self-acquired property of heirs, not ancestral or coparcenary property. Grandchildren possess no vested rights by birth in such property. The court emphasized that coparcenary property can only be created from pre-1956 ancestral property or through deliberate blending with existing coparcenary assets. Absent proper pleadings establishing joint family character, no presumption exists that property belongs to HUF. The suit disclosed no cause of action as succession was governed by Section 8 of the 1956 Act, and the main relief seeking cancellation was time-barred, rendering consequential reliefs equally barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
