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 issues were whether the adjudication confirming GST demand was vitiated by (i) denial of a statutorily mandated personal hearing under Section 75(4) and (ii) lack of jurisdiction under Section 75(7) in confirming demand beyond the show cause notice. The authority held that once a personal hearing is specifically requested, Section 75(4) imposes a mandatory duty to grant it; passing an ex parte order despite such request is a fatal breach of natural justice and cannot be cured by later merits review, rendering the order unsustainable. It further held that any final demand exceeding the amount proposed in the show cause notice is ultra vires under Section 75(7), vitiating the order. The adjudication and appellate orders were quashed and the matter remanded. - HC
The dominant issues were whether the adjudication confirming GST demand was vitiated by (i) denial of a statutorily mandated personal hearing under Section 75(4) and (ii) lack of jurisdiction under Section 75(7) in confirming demand beyond the show cause notice. The authority held that once a personal hearing is specifically requested, Section 75(4) imposes a mandatory duty to grant it; passing an ex parte order despite such request is a fatal breach of natural justice and cannot be cured by later merits review, rendering the order unsustainable. It further held that any final demand exceeding the amount proposed in the show cause notice is ultra vires under Section 75(7), vitiating the order. The adjudication and appellate orders were quashed and the matter remanded. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.