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 ruled that compounding of FEMA offenses cannot be claimed as a right after adjudication is complete. The petitioner initially filed a compounding application but failed to proceed after it was returned for lack of clarity. Instead, the petitioner participated in adjudication proceedings without objection, only seeking compounding after receiving an unfavorable ruling and penalty. The court determined this was an attempt to avoid payment and delay proceedings indefinitely. The HC noted that while compounding is permissible during ongoing adjudication, no provision exists for compounding after adjudication concludes, as this would render the Act's penal provisions ineffective and create an indefinite process. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
The HC ruled that compounding of FEMA offenses cannot be claimed as a right after adjudication is complete. The petitioner initially filed a compounding application but failed to proceed after it was returned for lack of clarity. Instead, the petitioner participated in adjudication proceedings without objection, only seeking compounding after receiving an unfavorable ruling and penalty. The court determined this was an attempt to avoid payment and delay proceedings indefinitely. The HC noted that while compounding is permissible during ongoing adjudication, no provision exists for compounding after adjudication concludes, as this would render the Act's penal provisions ineffective and create an indefinite process. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.