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 penalty imposed under the Customs Act, holding it non-maintainable due to availability of an efficacious statutory appeal under Section 128 and serious suppression of material facts. The petitioner, a power of attorney holder/agent, had concealed prior proceedings and the related order concerning the connected importers, despite a clear duty of full disclosure by both petitioner and counsel. The HC noted that the same Order-in-Original had already not been entertained in a previous writ by the importer and found no ground to exercise writ jurisdiction, particularly given disputed factual issues. The petition was dismissed with exemplary costs of Rs. 5,00,000, payable to the Delhi HC Staff Welfare Fund within four weeks.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the penalty imposed under the Customs Act, holding it non-maintainable due to availability of an efficacious statutory appeal under Section 128 and serious suppression of material facts. The petitioner, a power of attorney holder/agent, had concealed prior proceedings and the related order concerning the connected importers, despite a clear duty of full disclosure by both petitioner and counsel. The HC noted that the same Order-in-Original had already not been entertained in a previous writ by the importer and found no ground to exercise writ jurisdiction, particularly given disputed factual issues. The petition was dismissed with exemplary costs of Rs. 5,00,000, payable to the Delhi HC Staff Welfare Fund within four weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.