Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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.