PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 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 dismissed the writ petitions and upheld the constitutional validity of the proviso to s.194A(3) of the Income-tax Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2020. The court held that a proviso may operate substantively to alter a principal provision where legislative intent so indicates, and that the proviso here legitimately conditions the non-applicability of s.194A(1) on the payer's turnover/gross receipts without manifest arbitrariness or breach of legislative competence or fundamental rights. The petitioners, being primary agricultural credit societies not conducting banking as defined under the Banking Regulation Act, failed to establish entitlement to relief under s.194A(3)(iii). Accordingly, no interference was warranted.
The HC dismissed the writ petitions and upheld the constitutional validity of the proviso to s.194A(3) of the Income-tax Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2020. The court held that a proviso may operate substantively to alter a principal provision where legislative intent so indicates, and that the proviso here legitimately conditions the non-applicability of s.194A(1) on the payer's turnover/gross receipts without manifest arbitrariness or breach of legislative competence or fundamental rights. The petitioners, being primary agricultural credit societies not conducting banking as defined under the Banking Regulation Act, failed to establish entitlement to relief under s.194A(3)(iii). Accordingly, no interference was warranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.