Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Interest on borrowed capital was held deductible as revenue expenditure because the Tribunal's binding factual finding showed the investments in subsidiary or joint venture concerns were made for business expansion and commercial expediency in the assessee's fertilizer business. The Revenue's contrary view was rejected, and the later remand on actual use of borrowed funds was treated as academic in light of that finding. On rectification, the Court held that a prior liberty to move the Tribunal did not oblige it to allow rectification; no mistake apparent from the record was shown, so dismissal of the miscellaneous petition was proper. The appeal was dismissed.
Interest on borrowed capital was held deductible as revenue expenditure because the Tribunal's binding factual finding showed the investments in subsidiary or joint venture concerns were made for business expansion and commercial expediency in the assessee's fertilizer business. The Revenue's contrary view was rejected, and the later remand on actual use of borrowed funds was treated as academic in light of that finding. On rectification, the Court held that a prior liberty to move the Tribunal did not oblige it to allow rectification; no mistake apparent from the record was shown, so dismissal of the miscellaneous petition was proper. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.