Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Data transmission equipment classification under CTSH 8517 62 remains distinct from residual classification, with exemption evidence requiring scrutin...
The Appellate Tribunal held that flats purchased with consideration paid by the appellant, but registered in the names of others who did not pay for them, fell within the statutory definition of benami transaction. It further held that the amended definition under Section 2(9)(A) covered property still held in benamidars' names after the 2016 amendment, so the challenge based on pre-amendment origin failed. The objection that provisional attachment concerned non-existent property was also rejected because allotment letters were issued, consideration was paid, and registered agreements existed. Provisional attachment and its confirmation were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
The Appellate Tribunal held that flats purchased with consideration paid by the appellant, but registered in the names of others who did not pay for them, fell within the statutory definition of benami transaction. It further held that the amended definition under Section 2(9)(A) covered property still held in benamidars' names after the 2016 amendment, so the challenge based on pre-amendment origin failed. The objection that provisional attachment concerned non-existent property was also rejected because allotment letters were issued, consideration was paid, and registered agreements existed. Provisional attachment and its confirmation were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.