Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Properties treated as proceeds of crime remained attachable where the appellants failed to prove acquisition from independent lawful sources or payment of consideration. The Appellate Tribunal found that the respondent had established the foundational case that the assets originally stood with M/s AGFVIL and were later transferred through intermediary, namesake transactions without supporting proof of genuine purchase. For one appellant, the record showed only a shifted name without documentary evidence of consideration; for another, alleged loans, seller payment, and bank trail were not substantiated; for the third, the later explanation of source was inconsistent with her own statement and unsupported by material. The confirmation of the provisional attachment was upheld.
Properties treated as proceeds of crime remained attachable where the appellants failed to prove acquisition from independent lawful sources or payment of consideration. The Appellate Tribunal found that the respondent had established the foundational case that the assets originally stood with M/s AGFVIL and were later transferred through intermediary, namesake transactions without supporting proof of genuine purchase. For one appellant, the record showed only a shifted name without documentary evidence of consideration; for another, alleged loans, seller payment, and bank trail were not substantiated; for the third, the later explanation of source was inconsistent with her own statement and unsupported by material. The confirmation of the provisional attachment was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
