Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
Section 73(4B)(b) requires service-tax adjudication, where possible, within one year when the extended period is invoked. The qualification permits only a reasonable and legally justifiable departure, not an unrestricted power to keep a show-cause notice pending for an inordinate period. Where the notice material enabled adjudication and no adequate explanation existed, representations or claimed adjournments could not justify prolonged delay. Unexplained delay rendered the adjudication arbitrary, contrary to Section 73(4B)(b) and Article 14, leading to quashing of the service-tax order. Availability of a statutory appeal did not bar writ jurisdiction because the challenge raised a legal question and involved arbitrary adjudication.
Section 73(4B)(b) requires service-tax adjudication, where possible, within one year when the extended period is invoked. The qualification permits only a reasonable and legally justifiable departure, not an unrestricted power to keep a show-cause notice pending for an inordinate period. Where the notice material enabled adjudication and no adequate explanation existed, representations or claimed adjournments could not justify prolonged delay. Unexplained delay rendered the adjudication arbitrary, contrary to Section 73(4B)(b) and Article 14, leading to quashing of the service-tax order. Availability of a statutory appeal did not bar writ jurisdiction because the challenge raised a legal question and involved arbitrary adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.