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 granted ad-interim relief to the Petitioner, holding that under the pre-amendment proviso of s.275(1)(a) of the IT Act an order imposing penalty under Chapter XXI ought not be passed while an appeal against the assessment is pending before the Appellate Tribunal; accordingly the impugned penalty order is set aside and remitted to the AO with a direction that penalty proceedings be kept in abeyance until the ITAT disposes the pending appeal. The court found a strong prima facie case and balance of convenience in the Petitioner's favour, noting potential recovery of c. Rs.101 crore, and directed the Revenue to file any affidavit-in-reply by 12 Nov 2025.
The HC granted ad-interim relief to the Petitioner, holding that under the pre-amendment proviso of s.275(1)(a) of the IT Act an order imposing penalty under Chapter XXI ought not be passed while an appeal against the assessment is pending before the Appellate Tribunal; accordingly the impugned penalty order is set aside and remitted to the AO with a direction that penalty proceedings be kept in abeyance until the ITAT disposes the pending appeal. The court found a strong prima facie case and balance of convenience in the Petitioner's favour, noting potential recovery of c. Rs.101 crore, and directed the Revenue to file any affidavit-in-reply by 12 Nov 2025.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.