https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372577 The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned order and reference dated 29th December 2016. It held that the transactions in question did not qualify as Specified Domestic Transactions (SDTs) under section 92BA(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that the order was made without proper jurisdiction and violated the principles of natural justice. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, making the rule absolute without any order as to costs. en-us Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Aug 2019 12:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372577 The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned order and reference dated 29th December 2016. It held that the transactions in question did not qualify as Specified Domestic Transactions (SDTs) under section 92BA(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that the order was made without proper jurisdiction and violated the principles of natural justice. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, making the rule absolute without any order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372577