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" ?
Demand of duty and Levy of penalty - Levy of penalty on Director - Clandestine removal - The demand was based on data printouts retrieved from a third party's computer, which the Appellant contested, citing procedural irregularities. However, the Tribunal found the electronic evidence admissible as it was certified by the Forensic Department. Additionally, the Appellant failed to provide evidence to counter the allegations, leading to the confirmation of the demand. Regarding the imposition of penalties on the directors, the Tribunal noted the lack of personal involvement and shifted the burden of proof to the Appellant. As there was no evidence implicating the directors, the penalties were set aside.
Demand of duty and Levy of penalty - Levy of penalty on Director - Clandestine removal - The demand was based on data printouts retrieved from a third party's computer, which the Appellant contested, citing procedural irregularities. However, the Tribunal found the electronic evidence admissible as it was certified by the Forensic Department. Additionally, the Appellant failed to provide evidence to counter the allegations, leading to the confirmation of the demand. Regarding the imposition of penalties on the directors, the Tribunal noted the lack of personal involvement and shifted the burden of proof to the Appellant. As there was no evidence implicating the directors, the penalties were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.