Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3101 to 3120 of 96176 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A High Court, exercising limited Section 34 review, sustained the arbitrator's view that extensions of time justified corresponding rescheduling of milestones, so release of the withheld milestone amount was proper. It quashed interest on that withheld amount because the contract imposed an absolute bar on any interest. The court corrected the final bill figure to reflect an admitted clerical error. It also disallowed the post-GST differential tax claim for lack of proof of actual payment and annulled prolongation damages for want of able loss under Section 73. The refund of penalty for delay in the sample flat, along with interest other than on the withheld amount and costs, was maintained.
A High Court, exercising limited Section 34 review, sustained the arbitrator's view that extensions of time justified corresponding rescheduling of milestones, so release of the withheld milestone amount was proper. It quashed interest on that withheld amount because the contract imposed an absolute bar on any interest. The court corrected the final bill figure to reflect an admitted clerical error. It also disallowed the post-GST differential tax claim for lack of proof of actual payment and annulled prolongation damages for want of able loss under Section 73. The refund of penalty for delay in the sample flat, along with interest other than on the withheld amount and costs, was maintained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
