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 SC set aside the High Court's order awarding 15% interest on refund amount to a home buyer and restored NCDRC's order granting 9% interest. The Court found that while the buyer was entitled to refund due to significant construction delays, the 15% interest rate was excessive. Applying precedent from Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank, the Court determined that purchasers deserve reasonable interest when possession is delayed, but distinguished this case from Rohit Chaudhary v. Vipul Ltd., noting different circumstances. The compensation was reduced from 10,00,000 to 7,50,000, balancing justice considerations and the appellant's status as a state instrumentality. The appeal was partly allowed.
The SC set aside the High Court's order awarding 15% interest on refund amount to a home buyer and restored NCDRC's order granting 9% interest. The Court found that while the buyer was entitled to refund due to significant construction delays, the 15% interest rate was excessive. Applying precedent from Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank, the Court determined that purchasers deserve reasonable interest when possession is delayed, but distinguished this case from Rohit Chaudhary v. Vipul Ltd., noting different circumstances. The compensation was reduced from 10,00,000 to 7,50,000, balancing justice considerations and the appellant's status as a state instrumentality. The appeal was partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.