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" ?
Revocation of a customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and imposition of penalty were challenged on the ground that mandatory timelines under CBLR, 2018 were breached. The authority issued the show cause notice beyond 90 days from the offence report, submitted the enquiry report beyond 90 days from the show cause notice, and passed the final order beyond the stipulated period under Regulations 17(1), 17(5) and 17(7); these lapses rendered the proceedings and resultant order legally unsustainable, leading to quashing of the revocation, forfeiture, and penalty. The contention based on Circular No. 9/2010 was left open without adjudication. - HC
Revocation of a customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and imposition of penalty were challenged on the ground that mandatory timelines under CBLR, 2018 were breached. The authority issued the show cause notice beyond 90 days from the offence report, submitted the enquiry report beyond 90 days from the show cause notice, and passed the final order beyond the stipulated period under Regulations 17(1), 17(5) and 17(7); these lapses rendered the proceedings and resultant order legally unsustainable, leading to quashing of the revocation, forfeiture, and penalty. The contention based on Circular No. 9/2010 was left open without adjudication. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
