A small tweak in crew rest rules caused massive cancellations and airport disruptions. The case shows how untested aviation policies can destabilize entire national operations.
The Tribunal found that the JDA did not satisfy the statutory requirements of section 53A since possession was given only for limited development and no consideration was paid. Consequently, no transfer occurred under section 2(47), and capital gains could not be taxed for that year. The addition of ₹3,65,904 was directed to be deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that rebate and concession in fees to poor student claimed as donation is in accordance with object of the trust and hence deletion of disallowance of donation by CIT(A) is justifiable. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Tripura High Court held that an order accepting bond under section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC]from the accused doesn’t amount to a grant of bail. Accordingly, the present bail application is disposed of.
ITAT Delhi held that the addition of Rs. 73,99,475 as LTCG under Section 10(38) was unjustified, as the assessee provided complete evidence and no direct link to alleged bogus transactions was established.
In December 2025, India witnessed one of the most chaotic aviation disruptions in recent memory when IndiGo—India’s largest airline by market share—suddenly plunged into operational disorder. What began as a set of minor delays quickly escalated into a full-blown national aviation crisis, with more than 1,000 flights cancelled, thousands stranded across airports, regulatory intervention, political […]
Explains what triggers arrest under GST, how bail works for bailable and non-bailable offences, and the practical steps businesses must take to protect themselves.
A complete overview of the statutory process for raising capital through a rights issue, including offer preparation, allotment, filings, and timelines.
The Tribunal ruled that offshore supply receipts could not be taxed as the Revenue failed to establish any Permanent Establishment. It confirms that FOB-based offshore execution shields non-residents from Indian taxation.
Tribunal upheld 153C jurisdiction based on seized documents and statements, but rejected the AO’s full bogus-purchase addition, sustaining only a 10% profit estimation after book rejection under section 145(3).
