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" ?
HC held that the challenge to the original order u/s 73 pursuant to DRC-01 dated 30.05.2024 was infructuous, as the earlier demand dated 24.08.2024 stood obliterated and substituted by a revised order dated 18.03.2025 under s.161, raising a fresh demand of Rs. 3,85,35,356/- on different grounds. Observing that the petitioner did not cooperate or respond to notices dated 05.12.2024 and 25.01.2025, HC nevertheless remitted the matter to the 2nd respondent to pass a fresh order in lieu of the order dated 18.03.2025. The order dated 18.03.2025 is to operate as a show cause notice. Petition dismissed.
HC held that the challenge to the original order u/s 73 pursuant to DRC-01 dated 30.05.2024 was infructuous, as the earlier demand dated 24.08.2024 stood obliterated and substituted by a revised order dated 18.03.2025 under s.161, raising a fresh demand of Rs. 3,85,35,356/- on different grounds. Observing that the petitioner did not cooperate or respond to notices dated 05.12.2024 and 25.01.2025, HC nevertheless remitted the matter to the 2nd respondent to pass a fresh order in lieu of the order dated 18.03.2025. The order dated 18.03.2025 is to operate as a show cause notice. Petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.