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" ?
The High Court considered the challenge to notifications u/s 168A of CGST Act and U.P. GST Act extending time for adjudication orders for F.Y. 2017-18. - Adjudication / issuance of show cause notice (SCN) u/s 73 - It held that extension of limitation is a legislative function, not administrative. The Court noted the impact of COVID-19 and Supreme Court's order on limitation. The Council's discussions on delays due to pandemic were considered relevant. The Court emphasized that legislative decisions on "force majeure" are not subject to judicial review. It rejected claims of prejudice to taxpayers, stating limitation is statutory and not a vested right. The writ petitions challenging the notifications were dismissed, allowing pending adjudication proceedings to resume and appeals to be filed within 45 days.
The High Court considered the challenge to notifications u/s 168A of CGST Act and U.P. GST Act extending time for adjudication orders for F.Y. 2017-18. - Adjudication / issuance of show cause notice (SCN) u/s 73 - It held that extension of limitation is a legislative function, not administrative. The Court noted the impact of COVID-19 and Supreme Court's order on limitation. The Council's discussions on delays due to pandemic were considered relevant. The Court emphasized that legislative decisions on "force majeure" are not subject to judicial review. It rejected claims of prejudice to taxpayers, stating limitation is statutory and not a vested right. The writ petitions challenging the notifications were dismissed, allowing pending adjudication proceedings to resume and appeals to be filed within 45 days.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
