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 respondents rendered services related to site formation, clearance, excavation, earthmoving, and demolition for a hydro-electric project. The issue was whether these services qualified for the exemption under Notification No. 17/2005-ST for construction of a dam. The Tribunal held that hydro-electric projects are inseparable from dams, and the services rendered were towards dam construction, eligible for the exemption. Regarding the time limitation, the Tribunal opined that the respondents had a bona fide belief that the services were not taxable, and the Revenue failed to establish reasons for invoking the extended period. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, finding merit in the respondents' case on both substantive and limitation grounds.
The respondents rendered services related to site formation, clearance, excavation, earthmoving, and demolition for a hydro-electric project. The issue was whether these services qualified for the exemption under Notification No. 17/2005-ST for construction of a dam. The Tribunal held that hydro-electric projects are inseparable from dams, and the services rendered were towards dam construction, eligible for the exemption. Regarding the time limitation, the Tribunal opined that the respondents had a bona fide belief that the services were not taxable, and the Revenue failed to establish reasons for invoking the extended period. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, finding merit in the respondents' case on both substantive and limitation grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.