Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) is satisfied because the principal cause of action-the debit freezing of the petitioner's bank account-arose within the Court's territorial limits, permitting a writ petition challenging that freeze. The court applied the principle that a legal right infringed within territorial limits supports jurisdiction and distinguished prior authority where only a minor part of cause of action arose locally. The order holds that debit-freezing directed by police on January 6, 2025, lacked requisite magistrate-sanctioned seizure or attachment and is therefore quashed; the bank must restore account operation.
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) is satisfied because the principal cause of action-the debit freezing of the petitioner's bank account-arose within the Court's territorial limits, permitting a writ petition challenging that freeze. The court applied the principle that a legal right infringed within territorial limits supports jurisdiction and distinguished prior authority where only a minor part of cause of action arose locally. The order holds that debit-freezing directed by police on January 6, 2025, lacked requisite magistrate-sanctioned seizure or attachment and is therefore quashed; the bank must restore account operation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
