Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1001 to 1020 of 95833 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 order of ITAT allowing Applications filed u/s 254(2) - Rectification versus Review of order - TP Adjustment - The High court observed that the ITAT had rendered incompatible and inconsistent findings in its original order. - The court noted a contradiction between paragraphs 12 and 21 of the original order. - It was deemed necessary for the ITAT to recall its previous order and correct the error to avoid leaving the TPO and Assessing Officer in a quandary. - The court found that the issue of comparability regarding one company was left open for the ITAT's consideration, while another company's matter was remitted to the TPO. - Ultimately, the court determined that the appeal of Revenue did not raise any substantial question of law and dismissed it accordingly.
Validity of order of ITAT allowing Applications filed u/s 254(2) - Rectification versus Review of order - TP Adjustment - The High court observed that the ITAT had rendered incompatible and inconsistent findings in its original order. - The court noted a contradiction between paragraphs 12 and 21 of the original order. - It was deemed necessary for the ITAT to recall its previous order and correct the error to avoid leaving the TPO and Assessing Officer in a quandary. - The court found that the issue of comparability regarding one company was left open for the ITAT's consideration, while another company's matter was remitted to the TPO. - Ultimately, the court determined that the appeal of Revenue did not raise any substantial question of law and dismissed it accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.