Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Page of 4824
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 96463 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Validity of SCN - vague SCN issued u/s 74 - The High court noted that the issuance of a show-cause notice u/s 74 requires specific conditions, such as 'fraud' or 'wilful misstatement,' to be met. However, HC finds even if it be taken that the ‘suppression’ is not mentioned, to meet the requirement of Section 74 to issue the notice. It is not the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that it does not meet the requirements of Section 73. - The HC dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to respond to the notice and raise objections.
Validity of SCN - vague SCN issued u/s 74 - The High court noted that the issuance of a show-cause notice u/s 74 requires specific conditions, such as 'fraud' or 'wilful misstatement,' to be met. However, HC finds even if it be taken that the ‘suppression’ is not mentioned, to meet the requirement of Section 74 to issue the notice. It is not the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that it does not meet the requirements of Section 73. - The HC dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to respond to the notice and raise objections.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.