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 held the issue not res integra and ruled that once the respondent-revenue issued a final assessment order followed immediately by a demand notice, it was impermissible to thereafter recharacterize that order as a draft by issuing a corrigendum; such conduct amounted to an improper circumvention of the finality of assessment. The court quashed the impugned assessment order, the accompanying demand notice and the subsequent corrigendum, restoring the petitioner's procedural rights and precluding the respondent-revenue from sustaining any second or substitute assessment predicated on the reclassification. The remedies granted were declaratory and restitutive, with the impugned instruments set aside.
The HC held the issue not res integra and ruled that once the respondent-revenue issued a final assessment order followed immediately by a demand notice, it was impermissible to thereafter recharacterize that order as a draft by issuing a corrigendum; such conduct amounted to an improper circumvention of the finality of assessment. The court quashed the impugned assessment order, the accompanying demand notice and the subsequent corrigendum, restoring the petitioner's procedural rights and precluding the respondent-revenue from sustaining any second or substitute assessment predicated on the reclassification. The remedies granted were declaratory and restitutive, with the impugned instruments set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
