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 statute outlines that appeals can be filed to the High Court within sixty days from the date the decision or order is communicated to the aggrieved party, addressing any question of law or fact arising out of such order. 'High Court' has been defined to be the High Court within the jurisdiction of which the aggrieved party ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain. The Petitioner is based in Mumbai, conducting business and presumably working for gain there. Consequently, based on the explicit language of Section 42, the High Court of Bombay would ordinarily have jurisdiction to hear appeal against decision passed by the Appellate Tribunal. The Petitioner cannot override the statutory mechanism by relying on the geographical location of the Appellate Authority within this Court's jurisdiction. There is no basis for the Court to conclude that the alternate remedy is not equally efficient and adequate. The Court finds that the said remedy is both appropriate and sufficient for addressing the grievances presented by the Petitioner. There is no evidence to suggest that the remedy would be ineffective or lead to an injustice that justifies bypassing them. The Petitioner is free to pursue the available statutory remedies, which are deemed adequate for resolving the legal challenges at hand. Petition dismissed.
The statute outlines that appeals can be filed to the High Court within sixty days from the date the decision or order is communicated to the aggrieved party, addressing any question of law or fact arising out of such order. 'High Court' has been defined to be the High Court within the jurisdiction of which the aggrieved party ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain. The Petitioner is based in Mumbai, conducting business and presumably working for gain there. Consequently, based on the explicit language of Section 42, the High Court of Bombay would ordinarily have jurisdiction to hear appeal against decision passed by the Appellate Tribunal. The Petitioner cannot override the statutory mechanism by relying on the geographical location of the Appellate Authority within this Court's jurisdiction. There is no basis for the Court to conclude that the alternate remedy is not equally efficient and adequate. The Court finds that the said remedy is both appropriate and sufficient for addressing the grievances presented by the Petitioner. There is no evidence to suggest that the remedy would be ineffective or lead to an injustice that justifies bypassing them. The Petitioner is free to pursue the available statutory remedies, which are deemed adequate for resolving the legal challenges at hand. Petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.