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 case involved a challenge to the levy of Entry Tax on "PET Reisin" and "PVC Granuels" under the Assam Entry Tax Act, 2008. The issue was whether these items could be considered "chemicals" under Entry No. 51 of the Act. The court held that in the absence of a statutory definition, the common parlance test should apply. As the authorities failed to apply this test, the decision was not valid. Referring to a Supreme Court case, the court emphasized that the trade meaning should guide interpretation. Since the Act did not define "Chemicals," and specific items were listed separately, the court concluded that "PET Reisin" and "PVC Granuels" were not chemicals. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the assessment and orders, as they were not sustainable.
The case involved a challenge to the levy of Entry Tax on "PET Reisin" and "PVC Granuels" under the Assam Entry Tax Act, 2008. The issue was whether these items could be considered "chemicals" under Entry No. 51 of the Act. The court held that in the absence of a statutory definition, the common parlance test should apply. As the authorities failed to apply this test, the decision was not valid. Referring to a Supreme Court case, the court emphasized that the trade meaning should guide interpretation. Since the Act did not define "Chemicals," and specific items were listed separately, the court concluded that "PET Reisin" and "PVC Granuels" were not chemicals. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the assessment and orders, as they were not sustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.