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 CCI dismissed allegations of anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position under Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Regarding Section 3, the Commission found no evidence of bid-rigging or cartel behavior between the opposing parties despite allegations of a tacit agreement in tender awarding. For Section 4 claims, the Commission determined that appointment of a Project Management Consultant and issuance of an allegedly faulty Request for Proposal fell within the procurer's legitimate discretion and were not inherently abusive without supporting evidence of statutory violations. Finding no prima facie case of contravention, the Commission closed the matter under Section 26(2) of the Act and rejected the request for interim relief under Section 33.
The CCI dismissed allegations of anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position under Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Regarding Section 3, the Commission found no evidence of bid-rigging or cartel behavior between the opposing parties despite allegations of a tacit agreement in tender awarding. For Section 4 claims, the Commission determined that appointment of a Project Management Consultant and issuance of an allegedly faulty Request for Proposal fell within the procurer's legitimate discretion and were not inherently abusive without supporting evidence of statutory violations. Finding no prima facie case of contravention, the Commission closed the matter under Section 26(2) of the Act and rejected the request for interim relief under Section 33.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
