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 allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, holding that Section 138B applies exclusively to criminal prosecution proceedings and cannot be invoked to mandate cross-examination in civil adjudication under the Act. The Tribunal erred in directing cross-examination without finding that witness statements had been recorded and were intended to be relied upon against the respondent; consequently the direction was unfounded and unsustainable. The HC further found the Tribunal's remand limited to cross-examination defective for failing to address other contested issues. The case is returned to the Tribunal for de novo adjudication consistent with these principles.
The HC allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, holding that Section 138B applies exclusively to criminal prosecution proceedings and cannot be invoked to mandate cross-examination in civil adjudication under the Act. The Tribunal erred in directing cross-examination without finding that witness statements had been recorded and were intended to be relied upon against the respondent; consequently the direction was unfounded and unsustainable. The HC further found the Tribunal's remand limited to cross-examination defective for failing to address other contested issues. The case is returned to the Tribunal for de novo adjudication consistent with these principles.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
