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 an assessment order under s143(3) and penalty orders under s270A and s271AAD(1)(i) due to violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner received Annexure I to a show cause notice only two days before the scheduled hearing, insufficient time to respond adequately. Though the assessment was hurried to avoid statutory limitation under s153B, the court found procedural deficiencies warranting intervention. The court balanced interests by remitting the case back to the assessing officer for fresh consideration on merits. The court clarified that cross-examination of suppliers is only permissible when their statements are relied upon, and employee statements constitute admissions unless promptly retracted. The writ petition was allowed.
The HC quashed an assessment order under s143(3) and penalty orders under s270A and s271AAD(1)(i) due to violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner received Annexure I to a show cause notice only two days before the scheduled hearing, insufficient time to respond adequately. Though the assessment was hurried to avoid statutory limitation under s153B, the court found procedural deficiencies warranting intervention. The court balanced interests by remitting the case back to the assessing officer for fresh consideration on merits. The court clarified that cross-examination of suppliers is only permissible when their statements are relied upon, and employee statements constitute admissions unless promptly retracted. The writ petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.