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 ...
A composite assessment order covering more than one financial year was challenged as violating Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act, 2017. Applying binding precedent, it was held that a single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot validly relate to more than one tax period-either more than one month where proceedings are initiated before the due date for filing the annual return, or more than one year where the due date has been reached. Consequently, the impugned assessment order and the appellate order affirming it were set aside, with liberty to the department to initiate fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year. - HC
A composite assessment order covering more than one financial year was challenged as violating Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act, 2017. Applying binding precedent, it was held that a single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot validly relate to more than one tax period-either more than one month where proceedings are initiated before the due date for filing the annual return, or more than one year where the due date has been reached. Consequently, the impugned assessment order and the appellate order affirming it were set aside, with liberty to the department to initiate fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
