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...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Section 24(1)(a) of the 2013 Act applies where acquisition proceedings began under the 1894 Act but the award was made after the 2013 Act commenced; compensation must then be determined under the 2013 Act, while rehabilitation and resettlement entitlements are not retrospectively imported. Appeals from such awards are treated as first appeals under Section 74 of the 2013 Act, not under Section 54 of the 1894 Act. Section 74 does not expressly or impliedly exclude Section 5 of the Limitation Act, and Section 29(2) therefore permits condonation of delay. The delay in the first appeals was condoned, the contrary High Court rulings were set aside, and the matters were directed to proceed on merits.
Section 24(1)(a) of the 2013 Act applies where acquisition proceedings began under the 1894 Act but the award was made after the 2013 Act commenced; compensation must then be determined under the 2013 Act, while rehabilitation and resettlement entitlements are not retrospectively imported. Appeals from such awards are treated as first appeals under Section 74 of the 2013 Act, not under Section 54 of the 1894 Act. Section 74 does not expressly or impliedly exclude Section 5 of the Limitation Act, and Section 29(2) therefore permits condonation of delay. The delay in the first appeals was condoned, the contrary High Court rulings were set aside, and the matters were directed to proceed on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
