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 High Court quashed and set aside the demand raised u/s 154 for the Assessment Year 2013-2014 appearing on the petitioner's portal and the computation sheet dated 31st March 2021. The respondent's counsel informed the Court that the demand was uploaded by the erstwhile Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax on the portal, but the Department does not have any file or document to show that any notice was issued u/s 154 or an order was passed. The Court directed the respondents to remove the pending demand from the Income Tax Portal pertaining to the petitioner within two weeks. Additionally, the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai was directed to conduct an inquiry by an officer not below the rank of Additional Commissioner to ascertain how such a demand was uploaded and take necessary action against any erring officer if negligence or lapse is found.
The High Court quashed and set aside the demand raised u/s 154 for the Assessment Year 2013-2014 appearing on the petitioner's portal and the computation sheet dated 31st March 2021. The respondent's counsel informed the Court that the demand was uploaded by the erstwhile Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax on the portal, but the Department does not have any file or document to show that any notice was issued u/s 154 or an order was passed. The Court directed the respondents to remove the pending demand from the Income Tax Portal pertaining to the petitioner within two weeks. Additionally, the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai was directed to conduct an inquiry by an officer not below the rank of Additional Commissioner to ascertain how such a demand was uploaded and take necessary action against any erring officer if negligence or lapse is found.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
