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" ?
In HC proceedings the petition by the Petitioner challenging issuance of notice under s.148 was dismissed; the court held maintainability of writ under Articles 226/227 is distinct from the substantive adjudication under s.148A(d)/s.147 and is confined to whether credible information exists suggesting income has escaped assessment. The show-cause notice must be sufficiently reasoned to disclose the AO's intention and afford a reasonable opportunity to reply. The AO had recorded reasons based on material constituting credible information and applied mind; the Petitioner's merits-based defenses could not be tested at the notice stage. No interference was warranted at this intermediate stage; writ petition dismissed.
In HC proceedings the petition by the Petitioner challenging issuance of notice under s.148 was dismissed; the court held maintainability of writ under Articles 226/227 is distinct from the substantive adjudication under s.148A(d)/s.147 and is confined to whether credible information exists suggesting income has escaped assessment. The show-cause notice must be sufficiently reasoned to disclose the AO's intention and afford a reasonable opportunity to reply. The AO had recorded reasons based on material constituting credible information and applied mind; the Petitioner's merits-based defenses could not be tested at the notice stage. No interference was warranted at this intermediate stage; writ petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.