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 ...
The dominant issue was whether multiple tax periods/financial years could be clubbed in a single/composite show cause notice under Sections 73/74 of the CGST/KGST Act. Relying on its earlier precedent, the Court held that such clubbing/consolidation/bunching is illegal, invalid, impermissible, and without jurisdiction, being contrary to the CGST/KGST Act; consequently, the composite show cause notice and its addendum were quashed. All consequential communications, the subsequent orders including the order-in-original, and all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice were also quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
The dominant issue was whether multiple tax periods/financial years could be clubbed in a single/composite show cause notice under Sections 73/74 of the CGST/KGST Act. Relying on its earlier precedent, the Court held that such clubbing/consolidation/bunching is illegal, invalid, impermissible, and without jurisdiction, being contrary to the CGST/KGST Act; consequently, the composite show cause notice and its addendum were quashed. All consequential communications, the subsequent orders including the order-in-original, and all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice were also quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.