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 allowed the petition by way of remand, directing that the matter be referred to the concerned Adjudicating Authority to determine within three months whether amounts recovered by the petitioner for electricity supply are exigible to service tax under the Finance Act, 1994. The HC declined to adjudicate merits, holding writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 does not permit reappreciation of evidence or factual findings and noting the appellate order was not challenged. The court observed the petitioner has made a prima facie showing that charges mirrored those of the distribution company, but bills and records must be examined by the Adjudicating Authority before any tax liability is fixed.
The HC allowed the petition by way of remand, directing that the matter be referred to the concerned Adjudicating Authority to determine within three months whether amounts recovered by the petitioner for electricity supply are exigible to service tax under the Finance Act, 1994. The HC declined to adjudicate merits, holding writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 does not permit reappreciation of evidence or factual findings and noting the appellate order was not challenged. The court observed the petitioner has made a prima facie showing that charges mirrored those of the distribution company, but bills and records must be examined by the Adjudicating Authority before any tax liability is fixed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.