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 dismissed the petition, emphasizing the availability of an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy which the petitioner failed to utilize. The court held that the petitioner's attempt to circumvent the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for instituting an appeal was unjustified. The HC reaffirmed the principle that extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be exercised to bypass prescribed statutory procedures unless stringent conditions, as established by precedent, are met. The decision aligns with the SC's recent stance that statutory remedies should not be circumvented through constitutional petitions, thereby upholding the integrity of the statutory appeal process.
The HC dismissed the petition, emphasizing the availability of an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy which the petitioner failed to utilize. The court held that the petitioner's attempt to circumvent the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for instituting an appeal was unjustified. The HC reaffirmed the principle that extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be exercised to bypass prescribed statutory procedures unless stringent conditions, as established by precedent, are met. The decision aligns with the SC's recent stance that statutory remedies should not be circumvented through constitutional petitions, thereby upholding the integrity of the statutory appeal process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.