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 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the AT's impugned order dated 06.02.2019, holding the AA's confirmation of property retention legally unsustainable. The court observed that while leniency may apply to condonation of delay in re-filing appeals, appellants must still show sufficient cause; however, given prolonged pendency and prior consideration of delay, detailed scrutiny of a 143-day delay was unnecessary. Crucially, the AA failed to give reasoned findings as required by Sections 8(2) and 8(3) of the PMLA and could not rely on absence of the Respondent to avoid independent adjudication. The HC concluded that the AA's order was mechanical and void, and affirmed the AT's decision, dismissing the appeal.
The HC dismissed the appeal and affirmed the AT's impugned order dated 06.02.2019, holding the AA's confirmation of property retention legally unsustainable. The court observed that while leniency may apply to condonation of delay in re-filing appeals, appellants must still show sufficient cause; however, given prolonged pendency and prior consideration of delay, detailed scrutiny of a 143-day delay was unnecessary. Crucially, the AA failed to give reasoned findings as required by Sections 8(2) and 8(3) of the PMLA and could not rely on absence of the Respondent to avoid independent adjudication. The HC concluded that the AA's order was mechanical and void, and affirmed the AT's decision, dismissing the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
