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" ?
This appeal challenges the constitution of the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, alleging violation of principles of natural justice. The court held that the new law governing tribunals, including the Appellate Tribunal under PMLA, has been enacted based on Supreme Court observations. While the Adjudicating Authority is required to pass reasoned orders, it operates under tight time-frames and cannot be expected to address every issue raised through miscellaneous applications. The appellant's contention that a Judicial Member must be present was rejected, as no such ratio was laid down in the cited cases. The court also clarified that the 'reasons to believe' recorded u/s 17 for search and seizure need not be provided at the initial stage, as it is an administrative process, and parties are given an opportunity for hearing before confirmation by the Adjudicating Authority. Consequently, all appeals were dismissed.
This appeal challenges the constitution of the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, alleging violation of principles of natural justice. The court held that the new law governing tribunals, including the Appellate Tribunal under PMLA, has been enacted based on Supreme Court observations. While the Adjudicating Authority is required to pass reasoned orders, it operates under tight time-frames and cannot be expected to address every issue raised through miscellaneous applications. The appellant's contention that a Judicial Member must be present was rejected, as no such ratio was laid down in the cited cases. The court also clarified that the 'reasons to believe' recorded u/s 17 for search and seizure need not be provided at the initial stage, as it is an administrative process, and parties are given an opportunity for hearing before confirmation by the Adjudicating Authority. Consequently, all appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
