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 ruled on the maintainability of appeals under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. It held that the obligation to approach the Appellate Tribunal for drawing up a 'statement of case' for the High Court's consideration is a prerequisite, and appeals directly instituted without this step would not be maintainable. The hierarchy of remedies under the Act requires the assessee to first appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, and then approach the High Court by establishing a 'substantial question of law.' The obligation to petition the Tribunal for a statement of case is a procedural matter and does not impair the right of appeal, as the Tribunal's refusal is subject to review. Consequently, the appeals instituted before the High Court u/s 81 of the DVAT Act were held maintainable.
The High Court ruled on the maintainability of appeals under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. It held that the obligation to approach the Appellate Tribunal for drawing up a 'statement of case' for the High Court's consideration is a prerequisite, and appeals directly instituted without this step would not be maintainable. The hierarchy of remedies under the Act requires the assessee to first appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, and then approach the High Court by establishing a 'substantial question of law.' The obligation to petition the Tribunal for a statement of case is a procedural matter and does not impair the right of appeal, as the Tribunal's refusal is subject to review. Consequently, the appeals instituted before the High Court u/s 81 of the DVAT Act were held maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
