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 ...
The SC dismissed the Revenue's Special Leave Petition challenging the reopening of assessment under section 133A based on a survey of a bank. The petitioner's transactions with the bank involved inward and outward remittances, with discrepancies arising from the bank's use of both notional and actual realized exchange rates. The HC found that the petitioner had furnished all relevant material during the regular assessment, including bank statements reflecting actual realized rates, negating any prima facie belief of income escapement. The SC noted an unexplained inordinate delay of 198 days in filing and 79 days in refiling the SLP. On both procedural delay and substantive grounds, the SC upheld the High Court's order, concluding there was no justification to interfere with the assessment reopening. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
The SC dismissed the Revenue's Special Leave Petition challenging the reopening of assessment under section 133A based on a survey of a bank. The petitioner's transactions with the bank involved inward and outward remittances, with discrepancies arising from the bank's use of both notional and actual realized exchange rates. The HC found that the petitioner had furnished all relevant material during the regular assessment, including bank statements reflecting actual realized rates, negating any prima facie belief of income escapement. The SC noted an unexplained inordinate delay of 198 days in filing and 79 days in refiling the SLP. On both procedural delay and substantive grounds, the SC upheld the High Court's order, concluding there was no justification to interfere with the assessment reopening. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.