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" ?
Punishable offence u/s 148 - Failure to appoint cost auditor within the time limit prescribed under Section 148(3) and Rule 6(2) - The persons/accused of an offence cannot be based on the date on which the complaint is filed. The accused would and should remain the same whenever the complaint is filed since the offence is committed on a particular date. Persons who came to know of the offence subsequently cannot be made liable merely because the offence is continuing. - the petitioner joined on 02.05.2016 and resigned on 01.08.2016, and the offence was committed on 01.10.2015, he cannot be held liable for the alleged violation - HC
Punishable offence u/s 148 - Failure to appoint cost auditor within the time limit prescribed under Section 148(3) and Rule 6(2) - The persons/accused of an offence cannot be based on the date on which the complaint is filed. The accused would and should remain the same whenever the complaint is filed since the offence is committed on a particular date. Persons who came to know of the offence subsequently cannot be made liable merely because the offence is continuing. - the petitioner joined on 02.05.2016 and resigned on 01.08.2016, and the offence was committed on 01.10.2015, he cannot be held liable for the alleged violation - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
