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 granted ad-interim relief, holding that the impugned notices and the assessment order dated 31.03.2022 are stayed and respondents, successors, subordinates and agents are restrained by injunction from taking further steps; prima facie the AO lacked jurisdiction to treat the Section 148 notice as a show-cause under Section 148A(b) or to pass an order under Section 148A(d), and no subsequent assessment has been completed. The court directed the Revenue to deposit Rs. 1,63,45,488 into court pending further orders, finding the recovery/adjustment from the petitioner prima facie impermissible and rejecting the Revenue's ITBA-based contention.
The HC granted ad-interim relief, holding that the impugned notices and the assessment order dated 31.03.2022 are stayed and respondents, successors, subordinates and agents are restrained by injunction from taking further steps; prima facie the AO lacked jurisdiction to treat the Section 148 notice as a show-cause under Section 148A(b) or to pass an order under Section 148A(d), and no subsequent assessment has been completed. The court directed the Revenue to deposit Rs. 1,63,45,488 into court pending further orders, finding the recovery/adjustment from the petitioner prima facie impermissible and rejecting the Revenue's ITBA-based contention.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.