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 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 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" ?
A writ petition challenging a GST appellate order was not entertained because an effective statutory appeal before the now-functioning GST Appellate Tribunal was available. The Court held that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used where a specialised remedy exists, especially when the petitioner's objections concerned GST issues suited to the Tribunal's examination. No exception applied: there was no challenge to the statute's vires, no lack of jurisdiction, and no violation of natural justice because the petitioner had participated and filed a reply. The petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy, with interim protection continued until the Tribunal decides the stay application.
A writ petition challenging a GST appellate order was not entertained because an effective statutory appeal before the now-functioning GST Appellate Tribunal was available. The Court held that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used where a specialised remedy exists, especially when the petitioner's objections concerned GST issues suited to the Tribunal's examination. No exception applied: there was no challenge to the statute's vires, no lack of jurisdiction, and no violation of natural justice because the petitioner had participated and filed a reply. The petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy, with interim protection continued until the Tribunal decides the stay application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.