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 a case u/s 129 of CGST Act regarding penalty imposition for a minor discrepancy in a Delivery Challan. The issue was whether non-disclosure of Kundan stones justified penalty imposition. The Court found compliance with Rule 55 of CGST Rules except for the mentioned discrepancy. It noted the error in presuming the purpose of transporting gold and held that the goods were for sampling, not sale. The Court quashed the penalty of Rs. 14,50,560 and allowed the petition, directing refund and granting liberty to proceed for the discrepancy.
The High Court considered a case u/s 129 of CGST Act regarding penalty imposition for a minor discrepancy in a Delivery Challan. The issue was whether non-disclosure of Kundan stones justified penalty imposition. The Court found compliance with Rule 55 of CGST Rules except for the mentioned discrepancy. It noted the error in presuming the purpose of transporting gold and held that the goods were for sampling, not sale. The Court quashed the penalty of Rs. 14,50,560 and allowed the petition, directing refund and granting liberty to proceed for the discrepancy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
