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 petitioner sought release of an export subsidy of Rs. 8,08,50,000/-. The respondent confirmed that the milk powder exported by the petitioner, amounting to 1617 metric tonnes, was from stock existing on June 30, 2018, entitling the petitioner to receive the export subsidy under the government resolution dated July 31, 2018. The court observed that once a similarly placed party like Indapur received such subsidy, which is a state largesse, the principles of reasonableness and fairness emanating from Article 14 of the Constitution of India require the respondents to extend similar treatment to the petitioner, who was identically placed. Differential treatment would result in a breach of the petitioner's right to non-discrimination under Article 14. The subsidy scheme is a welfare scheme, fully implemented and acted upon in Indapur's case. The Supreme Court judgments relied upon by the respondents regarding negative equality are distinguishable as the court had directed the release of export subsidy to Indapur based on its legal entitlement, without any illegality involved. Consequently, the respondents were directed to release the export subsidy amount of Rs. 8,08,50,000/- to the petitioner within six weeks.
The petitioner sought release of an export subsidy of Rs. 8,08,50,000/-. The respondent confirmed that the milk powder exported by the petitioner, amounting to 1617 metric tonnes, was from stock existing on June 30, 2018, entitling the petitioner to receive the export subsidy under the government resolution dated July 31, 2018. The court observed that once a similarly placed party like Indapur received such subsidy, which is a state largesse, the principles of reasonableness and fairness emanating from Article 14 of the Constitution of India require the respondents to extend similar treatment to the petitioner, who was identically placed. Differential treatment would result in a breach of the petitioner's right to non-discrimination under Article 14. The subsidy scheme is a welfare scheme, fully implemented and acted upon in Indapur's case. The Supreme Court judgments relied upon by the respondents regarding negative equality are distinguishable as the court had directed the release of export subsidy to Indapur based on its legal entitlement, without any illegality involved. Consequently, the respondents were directed to release the export subsidy amount of Rs. 8,08,50,000/- to the petitioner within six weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
