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" ?
Levy of penalty - the e-way bill had expired one hour fifteen minutes prior to interception - The High Court acknowledged that while the e-way bill had expired, the goods were accompanied by the necessary documents, and the delay was due to a vehicle breakdown. Citing previous judgments, the court emphasized that mens rea, or intention to evade tax, is essential for penalty imposition. It concluded that there was no evidence of such intent in this case. The court held that the authorities failed to consider the explanation for the delay, rendering the penalty unjustified. - It emphasized that the breach was minor and did not indicate any intention to evade tax. - The court concluded that the penalty order under Section 129(3) of the Act was not warranted.
Levy of penalty - the e-way bill had expired one hour fifteen minutes prior to interception - The High Court acknowledged that while the e-way bill had expired, the goods were accompanied by the necessary documents, and the delay was due to a vehicle breakdown. Citing previous judgments, the court emphasized that mens rea, or intention to evade tax, is essential for penalty imposition. It concluded that there was no evidence of such intent in this case. The court held that the authorities failed to consider the explanation for the delay, rendering the penalty unjustified. - It emphasized that the breach was minor and did not indicate any intention to evade tax. - The court concluded that the penalty order under Section 129(3) of the Act was not warranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.