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 quashed the assessment order u/s 143(3) after determining AO's lack of inherent jurisdiction. The Tribunal analyzed the case facts, noting the assessee's nil income return and subsequent notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1). Relying on CBDT Instruction No.1 of 2011 and precedent in Bhagyalaxmi Conclave (P) Ltd., the Tribunal found the AO exceeded jurisdictional limits. The revenue's challenge was unsuccessful, with the HC dismissing a similar appeal involving identical substantial legal questions. Consequently, the Tribunal's order setting aside the AO's assessment was upheld, effectively deciding against the revenue on jurisdictional grounds.
HC quashed the assessment order u/s 143(3) after determining AO's lack of inherent jurisdiction. The Tribunal analyzed the case facts, noting the assessee's nil income return and subsequent notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1). Relying on CBDT Instruction No.1 of 2011 and precedent in Bhagyalaxmi Conclave (P) Ltd., the Tribunal found the AO exceeded jurisdictional limits. The revenue's challenge was unsuccessful, with the HC dismissing a similar appeal involving identical substantial legal questions. Consequently, the Tribunal's order setting aside the AO's assessment was upheld, effectively deciding against the revenue on jurisdictional grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.