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" ?
Petitioner engaged in drilling bore wells for agriculturists claimed exemption under negative list entry of Finance Act, 1994. Court held that to invoke extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 73(1), mandatory requirements contemplated in Act were stated in show cause notice regarding petitioner's liability to pay service tax and penalties. Petitioner was given opportunity to reply and personal hearing. Once show cause notice invoking extended period is issued and inquiry conducted, grounds urged must be challenged through appeal under Act, not by challenging revenue's jurisdiction to issue notice. Availability of alternative efficacious remedy of appeal u/s 85 precludes entertaining writ petition under Article 226. No cogent reasons shown for revenue not providing sufficient cause to invoke extended period. Petition dismissed.
Petitioner engaged in drilling bore wells for agriculturists claimed exemption under negative list entry of Finance Act, 1994. Court held that to invoke extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 73(1), mandatory requirements contemplated in Act were stated in show cause notice regarding petitioner's liability to pay service tax and penalties. Petitioner was given opportunity to reply and personal hearing. Once show cause notice invoking extended period is issued and inquiry conducted, grounds urged must be challenged through appeal under Act, not by challenging revenue's jurisdiction to issue notice. Availability of alternative efficacious remedy of appeal u/s 85 precludes entertaining writ petition under Article 226. No cogent reasons shown for revenue not providing sufficient cause to invoke extended period. Petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.