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 dominant issue was whether the application sought genuine clarification of the earlier directions requiring an opt-out for sharing user data for non-WhatsApp purposes, or amounted to an impermissible review. The tribunal held that the core principle is restoration of user choice through purpose limitation and express, revocable consent for any non-essential collection or cross-use, disallowing unilateral, open-ended control over user data. It further held that it could consider the application to advance justice where clarification necessarily traverses into review. It clarified that the remedial directions in the impugned order apply to WhatsApp user data collection and sharing for all non-WhatsApp purposes, including both advertising and non-advertising uses, and allowed the application. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether the application sought genuine clarification of the earlier directions requiring an opt-out for sharing user data for non-WhatsApp purposes, or amounted to an impermissible review. The tribunal held that the core principle is restoration of user choice through purpose limitation and express, revocable consent for any non-essential collection or cross-use, disallowing unilateral, open-ended control over user data. It further held that it could consider the application to advance justice where clarification necessarily traverses into review. It clarified that the remedial directions in the impugned order apply to WhatsApp user data collection and sharing for all non-WhatsApp purposes, including both advertising and non-advertising uses, and allowed the application. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.