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 - Compliance with the E-Way bill as required under the provisions of the CGST/UPGST Act and related rule or not - presumption of tax evasion in its absence - The High Court scrutinized the timing of E-Way Bill download and interception, concluding that the E-Way Bill was indeed downloaded before the interception, indicating compliance with the law. The Court noted that the E-Way Bill and invoice matched the goods, suggesting no intent to evade tax. - The Court observed that the penalty order was passed on the same day as the show cause notice, denying the petitioner an opportunity to respond, thus violating principles of natural justice. In light of these findings, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the penalty orders and directing the refund of the tax and penalty amounts deposited by the petitioner.
Levy of penalty - Compliance with the E-Way bill as required under the provisions of the CGST/UPGST Act and related rule or not - presumption of tax evasion in its absence - The High Court scrutinized the timing of E-Way Bill download and interception, concluding that the E-Way Bill was indeed downloaded before the interception, indicating compliance with the law. The Court noted that the E-Way Bill and invoice matched the goods, suggesting no intent to evade tax. - The Court observed that the penalty order was passed on the same day as the show cause notice, denying the petitioner an opportunity to respond, thus violating principles of natural justice. In light of these findings, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the penalty orders and directing the refund of the tax and penalty amounts deposited by the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.