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 HC quashed a show cause notice (SCN) dated September 26, 2008, and the subsequent order in original dated February 28, 2019, due to inordinate delay in adjudication. The Court found no justification for the fifteen-year delay in adjudicating the SCN, particularly noting that despite dismissal of a stay application, the Adjudicating Authority failed to proceed expeditiously. Applying precedent from VOS Technologies, the HC emphasized that statutory authorities must establish they were genuinely hindered from resolving disputes with reasonable speed, and must prove either impracticability or factors beyond their control that prevented timely adjudication. The petition was allowed.
The HC quashed a show cause notice (SCN) dated September 26, 2008, and the subsequent order in original dated February 28, 2019, due to inordinate delay in adjudication. The Court found no justification for the fifteen-year delay in adjudicating the SCN, particularly noting that despite dismissal of a stay application, the Adjudicating Authority failed to proceed expeditiously. Applying precedent from VOS Technologies, the HC emphasized that statutory authorities must establish they were genuinely hindered from resolving disputes with reasonable speed, and must prove either impracticability or factors beyond their control that prevented timely adjudication. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
