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 upheld the validity of the summoning order under Sections 208 and 210 BNS issued by the Special CJM (Customs), affirming the trial court's jurisdiction to proceed against the appellant. The appellant's failure to respond to repeated summons from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence justified the summons and subsequent trial. Given the offences carry a maximum imprisonment of one month, there was no risk of arrest upon appearance. The appellant's request to appear via representative or video conferencing was deemed premature and should have been made to the Directorate or trial court, where it remains open for consideration. Finding no procedural irregularity or illegality, the HC dismissed the application under Section 528 BNS, directing the appellant to appear before the trial court and assert any available defenses, which the trial court must adjudicate in accordance with law.
The HC upheld the validity of the summoning order under Sections 208 and 210 BNS issued by the Special CJM (Customs), affirming the trial court's jurisdiction to proceed against the appellant. The appellant's failure to respond to repeated summons from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence justified the summons and subsequent trial. Given the offences carry a maximum imprisonment of one month, there was no risk of arrest upon appearance. The appellant's request to appear via representative or video conferencing was deemed premature and should have been made to the Directorate or trial court, where it remains open for consideration. Finding no procedural irregularity or illegality, the HC dismissed the application under Section 528 BNS, directing the appellant to appear before the trial court and assert any available defenses, which the trial court must adjudicate in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
