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" ?
HC set aside the penalty proceedings against the petitioner under ss. 112(a) and 114AA, holding the adjudicating authority's orders to be non-reasoned and in breach of principles of natural justice for failing to consider the petitioner's submissions. The court found mere conclusory statements of complicity insufficient for imposition of penalties. Without expressing a view on merits, the matter is remanded to respondent No. 2 for de novo adjudication, requiring issuance of a fresh order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and objectively considering all relevant factors and submissions. The respondent shall complete the exercise within 12 weeks from receipt of this order. Petition disposed of by remand.
HC set aside the penalty proceedings against the petitioner under ss. 112(a) and 114AA, holding the adjudicating authority's orders to be non-reasoned and in breach of principles of natural justice for failing to consider the petitioner's submissions. The court found mere conclusory statements of complicity insufficient for imposition of penalties. Without expressing a view on merits, the matter is remanded to respondent No. 2 for de novo adjudication, requiring issuance of a fresh order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and objectively considering all relevant factors and submissions. The respondent shall complete the exercise within 12 weeks from receipt of this order. Petition disposed of by remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
