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" ?
HC addressed a dispute regarding surcharge and purchase tax recovery. The court found inherent inconsistency in the State's argument - if surcharge differs from tax, Section 21(7)'s statutory bar against stay of recovery wouldn't apply; conversely, treating surcharge as tax would entitle the petitioner to Rule 15(2)(b) benefits, making recovery challengeable. Given petitioner's status as a Public Sector Undertaking with demonstrable ability to pay if ultimately required, HC granted stay on recovery proceedings pending resolution of Reference Applications before MSTT. The tribunal was directed to expeditiously decide these applications. Balance of convenience favored the petitioner, resulting in temporary suspension of recovery actions until MSTT's final determination.
HC addressed a dispute regarding surcharge and purchase tax recovery. The court found inherent inconsistency in the State's argument - if surcharge differs from tax, Section 21(7)'s statutory bar against stay of recovery wouldn't apply; conversely, treating surcharge as tax would entitle the petitioner to Rule 15(2)(b) benefits, making recovery challengeable. Given petitioner's status as a Public Sector Undertaking with demonstrable ability to pay if ultimately required, HC granted stay on recovery proceedings pending resolution of Reference Applications before MSTT. The tribunal was directed to expeditiously decide these applications. Balance of convenience favored the petitioner, resulting in temporary suspension of recovery actions until MSTT's final determination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
