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" ?
Rectification u/s 254 - The High Court acknowledges that the Tribunal is the final authority to ascertain facts. However, it must rectify any apparent mistakes in its orders under section 254(2) of the ITA. The High Court scrutinizes the Tribunal's decision and finds that the Tribunal did not dispute the details of loss filed by the petitioner before the AO and the Commissioner. Instead, it focused on whether the petitioner had claimed the loss from the transporters. Considering the above, the High Court sets aside and quashes the impugned order of the Tribunal.
Rectification u/s 254 - The High Court acknowledges that the Tribunal is the final authority to ascertain facts. However, it must rectify any apparent mistakes in its orders under section 254(2) of the ITA. The High Court scrutinizes the Tribunal's decision and finds that the Tribunal did not dispute the details of loss filed by the petitioner before the AO and the Commissioner. Instead, it focused on whether the petitioner had claimed the loss from the transporters. Considering the above, the High Court sets aside and quashes the impugned order of the Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.