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 ITAT set aside the order passed by the CIT/NFAC under section 250 in proceedings initiated under sections 147 read with 144 and 144B, concerning unexplained cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee failed to appear or submit written arguments before the CIT(A), who also did not issue a speaking order as required by section 250(6). Citing precedent, the ITAT held that the CIT(A) must dispose of the appeal on merits, even if ex parte. Consequently, the ITAT restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits and directed issuance of a speaking order in compliance with statutory requirements. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
The ITAT set aside the order passed by the CIT/NFAC under section 250 in proceedings initiated under sections 147 read with 144 and 144B, concerning unexplained cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee failed to appear or submit written arguments before the CIT(A), who also did not issue a speaking order as required by section 250(6). Citing precedent, the ITAT held that the CIT(A) must dispose of the appeal on merits, even if ex parte. Consequently, the ITAT restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits and directed issuance of a speaking order in compliance with statutory requirements. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
