Inaccurate-particulars penalties fail where transfer-pricing documentation shows good faith and due diligence, and underlying capital-gains additions ...
Transfer-pricing tolerance for software sub-licensing falls within the services range, eliminating the adjustment and requiring TDS-credit verificatio...
Customs Broker due diligence requires prescribed KYC, not detecting misdeclarations discoverable only through physical examination, defeating licence ...
E-filing system failure permits exclusion of affected time in insolvency appeals, preventing tribunal technology defects from defeating timely filings...
Questions of law proposed in an appeal from a Tribunal's...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengeable.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Questions of law proposed in an appeal from a Tribunal's miscellaneous-application order must arise from that order, rather than from an unaltered finding in the original appellate order. Where the miscellaneous order only modified the terms of remand and left intact the finding that an accepted sale-and-purchase software transaction subject to arm's length price determination did not give rise to a dependent agent permanent establishment issue, challenges to that finding fell outside the appeal's scope. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, while its right to challenge the original Tribunal order in accordance with law remained open.
Questions of law proposed in an appeal from a Tribunal's miscellaneous-application order must arise from that order, rather than from an unaltered finding in the original appellate order. Where the miscellaneous order only modified the terms of remand and left intact the finding that an accepted sale-and-purchase software transaction subject to arm's length price determination did not give rise to a dependent agent permanent establishment issue, challenges to that finding fell outside the appeal's scope. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, while its right to challenge the original Tribunal order in accordance with law remained open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.