Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
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...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 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 dismissed the petition challenging the assessment order u/s 144C of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer clarified that the impugned order was passed u/s 143(3) and not Section 144C, rectifying the systemic error reflecting it as an order u/s 144C. The petitioner's contention that the order was passed u/s 144C was incorrect, and the challenge based on this assumption was unsustainable after the Assessing Officer's clarification. Consequently, the High Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it with costs.
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the assessment order u/s 144C of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer clarified that the impugned order was passed u/s 143(3) and not Section 144C, rectifying the systemic error reflecting it as an order u/s 144C. The petitioner's contention that the order was passed u/s 144C was incorrect, and the challenge based on this assumption was unsustainable after the Assessing Officer's clarification. Consequently, the High Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it with costs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
