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 invalidated an assessment order for violating mandatory provisions under Section 144B read with the first proviso to Section 147 of the IT Act, rendering the assessment without jurisdiction and legally null. The Court emphasized that principles of audi alteram partem are fundamental to tax law, and refusing to permit the assessee to file returns would contradict the purpose of tax legislation. Following precedents in Jyotsna Mehta and Teerth Developers cases, the Court held that Section 144B incorporates principles of natural justice requiring reasonable opportunity for representation, which was absent in this case. Consequently, both the impugned assessment order and resulting demand notice were set aside as legally unsustainable.
The HC invalidated an assessment order for violating mandatory provisions under Section 144B read with the first proviso to Section 147 of the IT Act, rendering the assessment without jurisdiction and legally null. The Court emphasized that principles of audi alteram partem are fundamental to tax law, and refusing to permit the assessee to file returns would contradict the purpose of tax legislation. Following precedents in Jyotsna Mehta and Teerth Developers cases, the Court held that Section 144B incorporates principles of natural justice requiring reasonable opportunity for representation, which was absent in this case. Consequently, both the impugned assessment order and resulting demand notice were set aside as legally unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.