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" ?
Review petition - Validity of reopening of assessment - The High Court dismissed the review petitions seeking to challenge a common order dated 04.11.2022, which set aside assessment orders but remanded the matters back to the assessing officer. The petitioners argued errors in this remand and the absence of reasons for reopening assessments. However, the court found no merit in these arguments. It held that the circumstances of the case did not align with cited legal precedents and that the failure to furnish reasons did not invalidate the reassessment process due to a recognized technical glitch. Therefore, the court upheld the original order, dismissing the review petitions.
Review petition - Validity of reopening of assessment - The High Court dismissed the review petitions seeking to challenge a common order dated 04.11.2022, which set aside assessment orders but remanded the matters back to the assessing officer. The petitioners argued errors in this remand and the absence of reasons for reopening assessments. However, the court found no merit in these arguments. It held that the circumstances of the case did not align with cited legal precedents and that the failure to furnish reasons did not invalidate the reassessment process due to a recognized technical glitch. Therefore, the court upheld the original order, dismissing the review petitions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
