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" ?
HC dismissed the appeal, rejecting the plaintiff's plaint for permanent injunction. The court found critical deficiencies in the plaintiff's legal standing, specifically a non-disclosure of legal rights to the subject property. The plaintiff failed to establish a clear cause of action and proper legal basis for the suit. The court determined that any grievances regarding company mismanagement should be addressed under Section 241 of the Companies Act, 2013, rather than through the current litigation. The judgment emphasized procedural inadequacies and lack of substantive legal grounds, rendering the suit non-maintainable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without interference.
HC dismissed the appeal, rejecting the plaintiff's plaint for permanent injunction. The court found critical deficiencies in the plaintiff's legal standing, specifically a non-disclosure of legal rights to the subject property. The plaintiff failed to establish a clear cause of action and proper legal basis for the suit. The court determined that any grievances regarding company mismanagement should be addressed under Section 241 of the Companies Act, 2013, rather than through the current litigation. The judgment emphasized procedural inadequacies and lack of substantive legal grounds, rendering the suit non-maintainable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without interference.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
