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...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Imposition of penalty u/s 122(xiv) of the CGST Act - detention of goods and vehicle on the ground that vehicle was not carrying the valid e-way bill - whether the Superintendent of State Tax has exceeded his jurisdiction in imposing the penalty? - - HC For the breach which falls under Section 122(xiv), the penalty is fixed @₹ 10,000/-. So far the penalty for an amount equivalent to tax is concerned those are for the incidents when the tax is sought to be evaded or not deducted under Section 51 etc. The other incidences as cataloged in Section 122 of the CGST Act are not relevant to the present case and as such we are of the firm view that the Superintendent of State Tax has exceeded his jurisdiction while imposing the penalty.
Imposition of penalty u/s 122(xiv) of the CGST Act - detention of goods and vehicle on the ground that vehicle was not carrying the valid e-way bill - whether the Superintendent of State Tax has exceeded his jurisdiction in imposing the penalty? - - HC For the breach which falls under Section 122(xiv), the penalty is fixed @₹ 10,000/-. So far the penalty for an amount equivalent to tax is concerned those are for the incidents when the tax is sought to be evaded or not deducted under Section 51 etc. The other incidences as cataloged in Section 122 of the CGST Act are not relevant to the present case and as such we are of the firm view that the Superintendent of State Tax has exceeded his jurisdiction while imposing the penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
