Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
A HC held that the retrospective insertion of Section 16(5), with a non obstante clause overriding Section 16(4), permitted a registered person to avail input tax credit for the specified financial years if the Section 39 return was filed up to 30.11.2021. Because the return here had been filed on 28.11.2020 for the January to March 2020 period, the claim fell within that extended statutory window and could not be rejected as time-barred under Section 16(4). The impugned order and summary order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication under Section 16(5), leaving other contentions open.
A HC held that the retrospective insertion of Section 16(5), with a non obstante clause overriding Section 16(4), permitted a registered person to avail input tax credit for the specified financial years if the Section 39 return was filed up to 30.11.2021. Because the return here had been filed on 28.11.2020 for the January to March 2020 period, the claim fell within that extended statutory window and could not be rejected as time-barred under Section 16(4). The impugned order and summary order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication under Section 16(5), leaving other contentions open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.