Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
Advance rulings under Section 95(a) are prospective; where all contractual acts, possession and payment were completed before filing, the transaction is not a supply "being undertaken or proposed" and therefore falls outside the AAR's permissible scope. The authority found that the assignment of leasehold rights and related charges were fully executed before the application, so questions on taxability of land development charges and eligibility of input tax credit could not be determined by advance ruling. Consequence: the application was held not maintainable and the AAR declined to decide the substantive tax issues.
Advance rulings under Section 95(a) are prospective; where all contractual acts, possession and payment were completed before filing, the transaction is not a supply "being undertaken or proposed" and therefore falls outside the AAR's permissible scope. The authority found that the assignment of leasehold rights and related charges were fully executed before the application, so questions on taxability of land development charges and eligibility of input tax credit could not be determined by advance ruling. Consequence: the application was held not maintainable and the AAR declined to decide the substantive tax issues.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
