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 dismissed the writ petition challenging the CBI Court's refusal to discharge the petitioners for diverting duty-free imports and fabricating export documents, holding the petition non-maintainable. The court found petitioners knowingly sought relief barred by Section 19(3)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and cannot circumvent statutory prohibitions under Article 226 that could not be obtained under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C.; reliance on departmental exoneration was neither pleaded nor legally germane. Applying settled precedent, the HC refused to exercise inherent or extraordinary jurisdiction (Section 482 Cr.P.C./Article 226) to stay or quash proceedings pending before the Special Court and dismissed the petition.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the CBI Court's refusal to discharge the petitioners for diverting duty-free imports and fabricating export documents, holding the petition non-maintainable. The court found petitioners knowingly sought relief barred by Section 19(3)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and cannot circumvent statutory prohibitions under Article 226 that could not be obtained under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C.; reliance on departmental exoneration was neither pleaded nor legally germane. Applying settled precedent, the HC refused to exercise inherent or extraordinary jurisdiction (Section 482 Cr.P.C./Article 226) to stay or quash proceedings pending before the Special Court and dismissed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
