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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 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 petition and upheld the Respondent-Bank's June 13, 2025 order classifying the petitioner's account as "fraud" and reporting the petitioner to the regulator. The court found the impugned order to be reasoned, complied with the doctrine of audi alteram partem and the Master Directions (2024) requirement for issuance of a detailed show-cause notice furnishing the basis for fraud classification. The petitioner, a promoter/controller of the corporate borrower, was held liable for acts and omissions of the company; non-executive directors' roles were distinguished and exonerated. Absent any procedural infirmity or breach of natural-justice norms, the challenge to the fraud classification and reporting was rejected.
The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the Respondent-Bank's June 13, 2025 order classifying the petitioner's account as "fraud" and reporting the petitioner to the regulator. The court found the impugned order to be reasoned, complied with the doctrine of audi alteram partem and the Master Directions (2024) requirement for issuance of a detailed show-cause notice furnishing the basis for fraud classification. The petitioner, a promoter/controller of the corporate borrower, was held liable for acts and omissions of the company; non-executive directors' roles were distinguished and exonerated. Absent any procedural infirmity or breach of natural-justice norms, the challenge to the fraud classification and reporting was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
