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 Adjudicating Authority violated principles of natural justice by passing the Order-in-Original without affording the assessee a proper personal hearing. The portal entries and note did not specify the mandatory particulars of personal hearing, namely date, time and venue, as required during ongoing proceedings under section 75(5), including before passing any adverse order. As this procedural lapse vitiated the adjudication, the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 and the appellate order dated 06.03.2025 were quashed and set aside. The matter was remanded, directing the Adjudicating Authority to duly intimate the assessee of the date and time of personal hearing and proceed afresh in accordance with law.
HC held that the Adjudicating Authority violated principles of natural justice by passing the Order-in-Original without affording the assessee a proper personal hearing. The portal entries and note did not specify the mandatory particulars of personal hearing, namely date, time and venue, as required during ongoing proceedings under section 75(5), including before passing any adverse order. As this procedural lapse vitiated the adjudication, the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 and the appellate order dated 06.03.2025 were quashed and set aside. The matter was remanded, directing the Adjudicating Authority to duly intimate the assessee of the date and time of personal hearing and proceed afresh in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
