Fraudulently obtained SEIS scrips cannot support customs exemption; recovery, confiscation and penalties were sustained, but employee penalty fell awa...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5001 to 5020 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 79 did not bar the set off of brought forward business losses where the persons beneficially holding more than 51% of the voting power continued to hold that voting power on the relevant date; on the uncontroverted facts, the disqualifying change in shareholding was absent and the Revenue's challenge failed. An appellate authority could also entertain a lawful additional depreciation claim raised through a revised computation, because the restriction in Goetze (India) Ltd. applies only to the Assessing Officer and does not limit appellate powers. The Tribunal upheld allowance of both claims and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Section 79 did not bar the set off of brought forward business losses where the persons beneficially holding more than 51% of the voting power continued to hold that voting power on the relevant date; on the uncontroverted facts, the disqualifying change in shareholding was absent and the Revenue's challenge failed. An appellate authority could also entertain a lawful additional depreciation claim raised through a revised computation, because the restriction in Goetze (India) Ltd. applies only to the Assessing Officer and does not limit appellate powers. The Tribunal upheld allowance of both claims and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.