You may also like...
-
The recovery by the government was based on adjusted gross revenue of about ₹92,000 crore. The Supreme Court on Friday directed the managing directors and directors of telcos and other firms to explain why contempt action be not taken against them for non-compliance of its order to pay adjusted gross revenue (AGR) of ₹1.47 lakh crore to the Department of Telecommunications.
by Sekar Reporter · Published February 14, 2020
-
DEMAND AND STAY OF DEMAND UNDER INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY N.S.SUGANTHAN, ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Introduction: In this article, I am going to discuss with the readers about a simple but important topic in Income Tax Law called “Demand and Stay of Demand”. First of all, I’m going to discuss the concept of Demand, thereafter, on what occasions demand can be made and how to stay the demand if our clients’ claim is genuine and need interpretation by quasi judicial or judicial authority.
by Sekar Reporter · Published December 19, 2022
-
Temple land casemhc bench refuse to stay judge mahadevan order bench PARESH UPADHYAY, J. and SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J. (Order of the Court was made by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) Learned Additional Advocate General has taken this Court through the conclusions/ final directions recorded by learned single Judge, more particularly contained in para 22 of the impugned order. T.Kokilavane, learned advocate accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent in W.A.No.64 of 2022 and for the fourth respondent in W.A.No.74 of 2022. Mr.V.B.R.Menon, learned advocate accepts notice for the first respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and Mr.A.Radhakrishnan, party-in-person, appears for the first respondent in W.A.No.74 of 2022. Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader (H.R. & C.E.) accepts notice on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 in W.A.No.64 of 2022, second respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and for respondents 2 and 3 in W.A.No.74 of 2022.
by Sekar Reporter · Published January 30, 2022