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 refusal to recognize the petitioner's SPEC industrial division as a "Non Resident Dealer" under the specified exemption notification. The court distinguished this case from precedents involving adjacent units with inter-unit transfers or expansions, noting that the SPEC division manufactures distinct products from the petitioner's original unit, thereby qualifying as a separate unit under the notification. Consequently, the petitioner was liable for tax assessments for AY 2005-06 through 2009-10. The petitioner's challenge to the revision orders issued by the MP Commercial Board was dismissed, as the respondents correctly assessed tax based on the denial of Non Resident Dealer status for the SPEC division. The HC found no merit in the writ petitions and accordingly dismissed them.
The HC upheld the refusal to recognize the petitioner's SPEC industrial division as a "Non Resident Dealer" under the specified exemption notification. The court distinguished this case from precedents involving adjacent units with inter-unit transfers or expansions, noting that the SPEC division manufactures distinct products from the petitioner's original unit, thereby qualifying as a separate unit under the notification. Consequently, the petitioner was liable for tax assessments for AY 2005-06 through 2009-10. The petitioner's challenge to the revision orders issued by the MP Commercial Board was dismissed, as the respondents correctly assessed tax based on the denial of Non Resident Dealer status for the SPEC division. The HC found no merit in the writ petitions and accordingly dismissed them.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
