Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Approved resolution plans extinguish unsubmitted pre-approval tax claims, preventing later recovery outside the insolvency process and preserving a cl...
Transfer pricing comparability requires functional alignment and permits working capital adjustment, while APA margins cannot govern non-covered years...
Treaty benefit, goodwill depreciation and hedging costs: export commission disallowed, while key business deductions and depreciation claims succeeded...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
681 to 700 of 95794 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 set aside the appellate authority's order dated 17 February 2025 dismissing the petitioner's appeal on the ground of the petitioner's alleged intent to avail an Amnesty Scheme. The HC held that, even if withdrawal of the appeal was a precondition to claim amnesty, only the petitioner could elect to withdraw; the appellate authority had no jurisdiction to dismiss the appeal suo motu absent any withdrawal request. Such dismissal, without notice or hearing, unlawfully deprived the petitioner both of eligibility under the Amnesty Scheme and of adjudication on merits. The HC remanded the matter to the appellate authority to rehear and decide the appeal afresh on merits, in accordance with law. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
The HC set aside the appellate authority's order dated 17 February 2025 dismissing the petitioner's appeal on the ground of the petitioner's alleged intent to avail an Amnesty Scheme. The HC held that, even if withdrawal of the appeal was a precondition to claim amnesty, only the petitioner could elect to withdraw; the appellate authority had no jurisdiction to dismiss the appeal suo motu absent any withdrawal request. Such dismissal, without notice or hearing, unlawfully deprived the petitioner both of eligibility under the Amnesty Scheme and of adjudication on merits. The HC remanded the matter to the appellate authority to rehear and decide the appeal afresh on merits, in accordance with law. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
