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" ?
Validity of search and seizure u/s 132 - The Bombay High Court quashed the search and seizure actions conducted by the Income Tax Department u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court found that the authorization for the search was based on unverified and irrelevant information, failing to meet the statutory requirements. Procedural safeguards outlined in section 132 were not observed, rendering the search illegal. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements to ensure the legitimacy of such invasive actions. Despite invalidating the search, the court allowed the revenue to use any information obtained during the search in subsequent proceedings.
Validity of search and seizure u/s 132 - The Bombay High Court quashed the search and seizure actions conducted by the Income Tax Department u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court found that the authorization for the search was based on unverified and irrelevant information, failing to meet the statutory requirements. Procedural safeguards outlined in section 132 were not observed, rendering the search illegal. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements to ensure the legitimacy of such invasive actions. Despite invalidating the search, the court allowed the revenue to use any information obtained during the search in subsequent proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
