This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Assessee not entitled to benefit of s 220(7), wherein the income which arisen in Russia but not been brought in India and remitted to third country despite there been no restriction on remittance to India
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Ravina and Associates Private Limited and Another Vs CIT and Others (Delhi High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All High Courts, Delhi High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
High Court of Delhi
Writ Petition(C) No. 328, 340/2010
Decided on: 20 April 2011
Ravina and Associates Private Limited and Another Vs CIT and Others
Judgment
Sanjiv Khanna, J.
Delhi High Court judgment on Writ Petition No. 328, 340/2010 – Ravina and Associates vs CIT. Stay on recovery of tax demand. Key details here.
Ravina and Associates Private Limited and Ravina Khurana have filed the present writ petitions for stay of recovery of the outstanding demand of Rs.54,91,15,497/- for the assessment years 2004-2005, 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 in the case of Ravina and Associates Private Limite...
