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 set aside ITAT's interpretation that stricter culpability standards are required for imposing penalty under s.271(1)(c). The court relied on Dharamendra Textile Processors, which established strict liability for concealment or inaccurate particulars in returns, clarifying that willful concealment is not essential for civil liability under s.271(1)(c), unlike prosecution under s.276-C. The HC distinguished this from Dilip N. Shroff, which was deemed incorrectly decided. Despite correcting the legal principle, the HC declined to interfere with ITAT's deletion of penalty in the specific case, as the amount was below Rs.5 lakhs and the assessee was an individual, thus partially affirming the ITAT order.
The HC set aside ITAT's interpretation that stricter culpability standards are required for imposing penalty under s.271(1)(c). The court relied on Dharamendra Textile Processors, which established strict liability for concealment or inaccurate particulars in returns, clarifying that willful concealment is not essential for civil liability under s.271(1)(c), unlike prosecution under s.276-C. The HC distinguished this from Dilip N. Shroff, which was deemed incorrectly decided. Despite correcting the legal principle, the HC declined to interfere with ITAT's deletion of penalty in the specific case, as the amount was below Rs.5 lakhs and the assessee was an individual, thus partially affirming the ITAT order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.