Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Deduction under section 10A was allowed as an alternate claim even though the return had originally claimed section 10B, because Form 56F was furnished during assessment and the same units had already been allowed section 10A relief in earlier scrutiny years; in the absence of any material showing those earlier allowances were or revised, the Revenue could not deny eligibility in the later year. The Tribunal also held that the assessee failed to show that the assessment order was without jurisdiction, while the jurisdiction order under section 120 was on record, so the jurisdictional objection had no merit. The Revenue's appeal was rejected and the cross-objection was dismissed.
Deduction under section 10A was allowed as an alternate claim even though the return had originally claimed section 10B, because Form 56F was furnished during assessment and the same units had already been allowed section 10A relief in earlier scrutiny years; in the absence of any material showing those earlier allowances were or revised, the Revenue could not deny eligibility in the later year. The Tribunal also held that the assessee failed to show that the assessment order was without jurisdiction, while the jurisdiction order under section 120 was on record, so the jurisdictional objection had no merit. The Revenue's appeal was rejected and the cross-objection was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
