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 set aside the CBDT's order refusing condonation of a 3 years, 10 months and 23 days delay in filing a revised return by the Petitioner-Trust, holding that the delay arose from a bona fide belief that a second rectification application remained pending. Applying a justice-oriented approach to exercise under s.119(2)(b) of the IT Act rather than a pedantic one, the court found the delay was not deliberate, negligent or tainted by mala fides and that refusal to condone would cause grave hardship to the Petitioner. Consequently, the HC directed that the 4th Respondent ought to have condoned the delay and the impugned refusal is set aside.
The HC set aside the CBDT's order refusing condonation of a 3 years, 10 months and 23 days delay in filing a revised return by the Petitioner-Trust, holding that the delay arose from a bona fide belief that a second rectification application remained pending. Applying a justice-oriented approach to exercise under s.119(2)(b) of the IT Act rather than a pedantic one, the court found the delay was not deliberate, negligent or tainted by mala fides and that refusal to condone would cause grave hardship to the Petitioner. Consequently, the HC directed that the 4th Respondent ought to have condoned the delay and the impugned refusal is set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
