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 department had initiated action based on the appellant's Income Tax Return (ITR) and compared it with the Service Tax Returns (STR), considering the entire amount shown as 'Sale of Service' in the ITR as the presumptive value of services rendered during the financial year 2015-16. However, the Tribunal held that the ITR could have triggered an inquiry into the non-payment of service tax, if any, but it cannot be the basis for determining the value of services rendered, especially under the extended period of time by invoking fraud, suppression, etc., without any investigation or proof of evasion. The burden of proof lies on the revenue to establish the blameworthy conduct of the appellant. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, considering it a violation of the principles of natural justice.
The department had initiated action based on the appellant's Income Tax Return (ITR) and compared it with the Service Tax Returns (STR), considering the entire amount shown as 'Sale of Service' in the ITR as the presumptive value of services rendered during the financial year 2015-16. However, the Tribunal held that the ITR could have triggered an inquiry into the non-payment of service tax, if any, but it cannot be the basis for determining the value of services rendered, especially under the extended period of time by invoking fraud, suppression, etc., without any investigation or proof of evasion. The burden of proof lies on the revenue to establish the blameworthy conduct of the appellant. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, considering it a violation of the principles of natural justice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
