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 ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1461 to 1480 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A writ petition challenging GST search, seizure and adjudicatory action was declined because the petitioners had an efficacious statutory appeal and no exceptional ground for writ interference. The Court also found no prima facie merit in the objections to officer competence or adjudication by the officer concerned, noting the notification assigning powers to Central Tax Officers and the absence of any substantive merits challenge. A vires challenge to the impugned circulars was not entertained because such a challenge must be raised at the earliest and requires a strong prima facie case, which was not shown. The petitioners were left to pursue the appellate remedy, without any final adjudication on merits.
A writ petition challenging GST search, seizure and adjudicatory action was declined because the petitioners had an efficacious statutory appeal and no exceptional ground for writ interference. The Court also found no prima facie merit in the objections to officer competence or adjudication by the officer concerned, noting the notification assigning powers to Central Tax Officers and the absence of any substantive merits challenge. A vires challenge to the impugned circulars was not entertained because such a challenge must be raised at the earliest and requires a strong prima facie case, which was not shown. The petitioners were left to pursue the appellate remedy, without any final adjudication on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
