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 held that the product manufactured under a valid drug licence is classifiable as a drug/medicine under Entry 19-A, Part II, Schedule II of the MPVAT Act, and not as a cosmetic/beauty product. The HC quashed the impugned orders of the Commercial Tax Appellate Board and the Commercial Tax Board that had reclassified the product under other Schedule entries, answered the legal questions in favour of the appellant, and directed that the appellant is not liable to pay interest under Section 18(1)(a) of the MPVAT Act. Both VAT appeals were allowed and the appeals disposed.
The HC held that the product manufactured under a valid drug licence is classifiable as a drug/medicine under Entry 19-A, Part II, Schedule II of the MPVAT Act, and not as a cosmetic/beauty product. The HC quashed the impugned orders of the Commercial Tax Appellate Board and the Commercial Tax Board that had reclassified the product under other Schedule entries, answered the legal questions in favour of the appellant, and directed that the appellant is not liable to pay interest under Section 18(1)(a) of the MPVAT Act. Both VAT appeals were allowed and the appeals disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.