Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
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...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In review proceedings concerning FEMA and TISPRO allegations, the HC reiterated that, where no limitation period is prescribed, whether a show-cause notice was issued within a reasonable period is fact-specific and should be urged before the adjudicating authority, with statutory appellate remedies remaining available under FEMA. It refused to treat prior case law on reassessment or statutory delay as a universal bar to penal proceedings, and held that issues about RBI notification timing, the FDI policy, exit from the company, and the definition of "Group Company" were merits-based and partly fact-disputed. Finding no error apparent in the earlier writ order, the review applications were dismissed.
In review proceedings concerning FEMA and TISPRO allegations, the HC reiterated that, where no limitation period is prescribed, whether a show-cause notice was issued within a reasonable period is fact-specific and should be urged before the adjudicating authority, with statutory appellate remedies remaining available under FEMA. It refused to treat prior case law on reassessment or statutory delay as a universal bar to penal proceedings, and held that issues about RBI notification timing, the FDI policy, exit from the company, and the definition of "Group Company" were merits-based and partly fact-disputed. Finding no error apparent in the earlier writ order, the review applications were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.