Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
The High Court partly allowed the challenge to the assessment order passed by the second respondent for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The Court quashed the impugned Assessment Order for violating principles of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction. It remitted the case to the respondents to pass a fresh order, subject to conditions: the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the disputed tax of Rs. 31,56,386/- within six weeks, and file a detailed reply to the quashed Assessment Order, treated as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 11.02.2021, within thirty days. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
The High Court partly allowed the challenge to the assessment order passed by the second respondent for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The Court quashed the impugned Assessment Order for violating principles of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction. It remitted the case to the respondents to pass a fresh order, subject to conditions: the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the disputed tax of Rs. 31,56,386/- within six weeks, and file a detailed reply to the quashed Assessment Order, treated as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 11.02.2021, within thirty days. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.