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 CESTAT held that the impugned SCN was unsustainable because it failed to specify which taxable category applied to each receipt, and a statement issued under s.73(1A) was invalid where its grounds differed from the earlier SCN; accordingly demands on unspecified receipts were set aside. The Tribunal found the appellant to be a Governmental Authority and, for the years concerned, receipts relating to municipal functions and non-commercial construction are exempt under the relevant mega-notification; composite construction taxability could not be sustained without valuation machinery. Reverse-charge liability for legal services did not attach to the Governmental Authority. Matters concerning taxable commercial construction were remanded for quantification; penalty under s.70 read with Rule 7C was upheld. Appeals partially allowed and remitted.
The CESTAT held that the impugned SCN was unsustainable because it failed to specify which taxable category applied to each receipt, and a statement issued under s.73(1A) was invalid where its grounds differed from the earlier SCN; accordingly demands on unspecified receipts were set aside. The Tribunal found the appellant to be a Governmental Authority and, for the years concerned, receipts relating to municipal functions and non-commercial construction are exempt under the relevant mega-notification; composite construction taxability could not be sustained without valuation machinery. Reverse-charge liability for legal services did not attach to the Governmental Authority. Matters concerning taxable commercial construction were remanded for quantification; penalty under s.70 read with Rule 7C was upheld. Appeals partially allowed and remitted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.