Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging the impugned assessment order issued following notice in DRC 01, noting that the petitioner had already undergone an assessment for the same period by the State Tax Officer. The court held that the statutory scheme precludes duplication of assessment proceedings for the identical period. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. However, the respondents were granted liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings to recover any differential amount within the framework of the earlier assessment, provided the statutory provisions permit such action.
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging the impugned assessment order issued following notice in DRC 01, noting that the petitioner had already undergone an assessment for the same period by the State Tax Officer. The court held that the statutory scheme precludes duplication of assessment proceedings for the identical period. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. However, the respondents were granted liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings to recover any differential amount within the framework of the earlier assessment, provided the statutory provisions permit such action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.