Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 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 modified the stay conditions relating to an ex parte faceless assessment order which fixed taxable income at an amount vastly exceeding the assessee's reported earnings and where Revenue had seized bank accounts and immovable property. The court found the earlier requirement-payment of Rs.5 lakh per month until 20% of the demand was discharged-unduly onerous and substituted an interim regime: the assessee must pay Rs.1,00,000 per month until either 5% of the outstanding demand is paid or the appellate authority decides the appeal, whichever occurs earlier. The HC directed the appellate authority to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within four months of receipt of certified copy, and restrained the assessee from alienating or mortgaging immovable property without prior written permission of the jurisdictional AO.
The HC modified the stay conditions relating to an ex parte faceless assessment order which fixed taxable income at an amount vastly exceeding the assessee's reported earnings and where Revenue had seized bank accounts and immovable property. The court found the earlier requirement-payment of Rs.5 lakh per month until 20% of the demand was discharged-unduly onerous and substituted an interim regime: the assessee must pay Rs.1,00,000 per month until either 5% of the outstanding demand is paid or the appellate authority decides the appeal, whichever occurs earlier. The HC directed the appellate authority to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within four months of receipt of certified copy, and restrained the assessee from alienating or mortgaging immovable property without prior written permission of the jurisdictional AO.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
