Permanent establishment tests: independent subsidiary premises and principal-to-principal dealings did not create Indian taxability for offshore suppl...
Valuation Officer estimates govern property-value additions once statutory valuation is invoked, requiring fresh consideration of objections and compa...
Waiver of written show-cause notice may prevent a later procedural challenge after participation in customs adjudication, preserving statutory appella...
Retrospective invalidity of ocean-freight IGST supports refunds despite non-party status and prior credit utilisation, subject to authorised appeal gr...
Additional evidence in departmental appeals may include show-cause-notice material without introducing a new case where it merely corroborates existin...
Reasoned rectification orders require consideration of expenditure disclosed in income-tax returns, preventing revision based on incomplete income com...
Modified returns after business reorganisations cannot trigger fresh scrutiny once the original assessment was complete, invalidating related transfer...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 97820 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
PFUTP liability for alleged settlement-price depression requires...
Settlement-price depression requires proof of manipulation, not merely short exposure, late selling, or below-market orders, preserving disclosure penalties.
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
PFUTP liability for alleged settlement-price depression requires cogent evidence of a manipulative act directed at producing an artificial price, not merely a large short derivatives position, closing-window cash sales, or sell orders below the last traded price. Fraud under Regulation 2(1)(c) ordinarily requires inducement; where inducement is not directly established, manipulation requires compelling evidence from market-wide activity, execution mechanics, commercial rationale, and causal price impact. Position-limit breaches and agency-based concentration may support disclosure penalties but do not alone prove fraud. Combined exposure across all derivative contracts must be considered where required by the governing framework. Failure to establish intended price depression precluded PFUTP fraud and disgorgement, while the non-disclosure penalty remained.
PFUTP liability for alleged settlement-price depression requires cogent evidence of a manipulative act directed at producing an artificial price, not merely a large short derivatives position, closing-window cash sales, or sell orders below the last traded price. Fraud under Regulation 2(1)(c) ordinarily requires inducement; where inducement is not directly established, manipulation requires compelling evidence from market-wide activity, execution mechanics, commercial rationale, and causal price impact. Position-limit breaches and agency-based concentration may support disclosure penalties but do not alone prove fraud. Combined exposure across all derivative contracts must be considered where required by the governing framework. Failure to establish intended price depression precluded PFUTP fraud and disgorgement, while the non-disclosure penalty remained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
