Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that penalty proceedings initiated under two sections simultaneously are valid, but satisfaction must be recorded during assessment proceedings. The AO cannot record reasons for penalty after proceedings conclude. The tribunal's order quashing the revisional authority's directive was upheld, effectively ruling against the revenue. The core legal principle emphasizes that procedural satisfaction for imposing penalties must be contemporaneous with assessment proceedings, not retrospectively constructed. The decision reinforces strict procedural compliance in tax penalty impositions, ensuring that administrative discretion is exercised within prescribed temporal boundaries.
HC held that penalty proceedings initiated under two sections simultaneously are valid, but satisfaction must be recorded during assessment proceedings. The AO cannot record reasons for penalty after proceedings conclude. The tribunal's order quashing the revisional authority's directive was upheld, effectively ruling against the revenue. The core legal principle emphasizes that procedural satisfaction for imposing penalties must be contemporaneous with assessment proceedings, not retrospectively constructed. The decision reinforces strict procedural compliance in tax penalty impositions, ensuring that administrative discretion is exercised within prescribed temporal boundaries.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.