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" ?
Dishonour of Cheque - non-application of mind - The High Court highlighted the presumption in favor of the complainant under Section 139 of the N.I. Act and affirmed the accused's right to contest the matter by presenting a plausible defense - It concluded that the magistrate erred in rejecting the application solely on the grounds of vagueness, as the disclosed defenses were sufficient to warrant cross-examination. The Court emphasized the magistrate's duty to ascertain whether the defense presented by the accused is probable and not merely a "moonshine defense."
Dishonour of Cheque - non-application of mind - The High Court highlighted the presumption in favor of the complainant under Section 139 of the N.I. Act and affirmed the accused's right to contest the matter by presenting a plausible defense - It concluded that the magistrate erred in rejecting the application solely on the grounds of vagueness, as the disclosed defenses were sufficient to warrant cross-examination. The Court emphasized the magistrate's duty to ascertain whether the defense presented by the accused is probable and not merely a "moonshine defense."
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
