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 dismissed the petition and upheld the assessment, finding concurrent findings of fact by the AO and the Tribunal that the appellant suppressed income and that requirements of s.158BD (and related provisions) were satisfied. The Tribunal's reliance on witness testimony and documentary material supported the AO's satisfaction that undisclosed income pertained to the appellant. The Court held the matter did not raise a substantial question of law under s.260A but merely questions of fact and application of settled statutory provisions; accordingly the assessment under the relevant provisions was sustained and the challenge on the ground of absence of recorded satisfaction by the AO failed.
The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the assessment, finding concurrent findings of fact by the AO and the Tribunal that the appellant suppressed income and that requirements of s.158BD (and related provisions) were satisfied. The Tribunal's reliance on witness testimony and documentary material supported the AO's satisfaction that undisclosed income pertained to the appellant. The Court held the matter did not raise a substantial question of law under s.260A but merely questions of fact and application of settled statutory provisions; accordingly the assessment under the relevant provisions was sustained and the challenge on the ground of absence of recorded satisfaction by the AO failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.