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" ?
Legal principles governing the initiation of criminal proceedings and the implications of settlement or immunity orders on such proceedings. It clarifies that mere registration of an FIR does not constitute initiation of proceedings; cognizance is taken only after a final report u/s 173(2) of CrPC. The court discusses a precedent where continuation of prosecution was deemed inconsistent with the intent of a settlement scheme. It further examines the impact of an immunity order granted to the appellant company, concluding that pursuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process since the basis of allegations was non-existent. Consequently, the impugned order taking cognizance against the appellant company is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.
Legal principles governing the initiation of criminal proceedings and the implications of settlement or immunity orders on such proceedings. It clarifies that mere registration of an FIR does not constitute initiation of proceedings; cognizance is taken only after a final report u/s 173(2) of CrPC. The court discusses a precedent where continuation of prosecution was deemed inconsistent with the intent of a settlement scheme. It further examines the impact of an immunity order granted to the appellant company, concluding that pursuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process since the basis of allegations was non-existent. Consequently, the impugned order taking cognizance against the appellant company is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
