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 rejected applicant's reference application under Chhattisgarh Value Added Sales Tax Act, 2005. Applicant failed to produce mandatory Form 3 for eight years to discharge burden of proof regarding sub-contractor's tax payment on turnover. Court held that reference jurisdiction is purely advisory and consultative, requiring substantial question of law under Section 55(2). Payment of tax by sub-contractor remained disputed question of fact, not law, as Form 3 was not produced within statutory timeframe. No statutory duty exists compelling Department to grant indefinite extensions for Form 3 submission. Absence of Form 3 negated double taxation concerns. Court distinguished between questions of fact versus law, concluding no legal question arose warranting HC's adjudication in reference proceedings.
HC rejected applicant's reference application under Chhattisgarh Value Added Sales Tax Act, 2005. Applicant failed to produce mandatory Form 3 for eight years to discharge burden of proof regarding sub-contractor's tax payment on turnover. Court held that reference jurisdiction is purely advisory and consultative, requiring substantial question of law under Section 55(2). Payment of tax by sub-contractor remained disputed question of fact, not law, as Form 3 was not produced within statutory timeframe. No statutory duty exists compelling Department to grant indefinite extensions for Form 3 submission. Absence of Form 3 negated double taxation concerns. Court distinguished between questions of fact versus law, concluding no legal question arose warranting HC's adjudication in reference proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.