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 writ petitions and quashed and set aside the impugned show-cause notices issued to the petitioners dated 13.02.2025 and 23.05.2025. The court held the notices under Rule 4(2) read with s.31 of the GVAT Act lacked any communicated opinion or tangible material evidencing turnover escaping assessment, amounting to impermissible reopening and review in the absence of cogent grounds; further the reassessment demands were time-barred under the statutory eight-year limitation. Separately, provisions conferring unfettered discretion (notably s.6 and the exemption in s.22) were declared constitutionally invalid for constituting uncanalised, arbitrary delegation of taxing power without guiding principles or safeguards.
The HC allowed the writ petitions and quashed and set aside the impugned show-cause notices issued to the petitioners dated 13.02.2025 and 23.05.2025. The court held the notices under Rule 4(2) read with s.31 of the GVAT Act lacked any communicated opinion or tangible material evidencing turnover escaping assessment, amounting to impermissible reopening and review in the absence of cogent grounds; further the reassessment demands were time-barred under the statutory eight-year limitation. Separately, provisions conferring unfettered discretion (notably s.6 and the exemption in s.22) were declared constitutionally invalid for constituting uncanalised, arbitrary delegation of taxing power without guiding principles or safeguards.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
