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" ?
In a prosecution alleging creation and operation of multiple firms to wrongfully avail and pass on input tax credit exceeding ₹30 crores under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the court assessed whether continued pre-trial custody was warranted. Noting that the maximum punishment is five years, that the allegations remained to be proved, that the accused had been in custody since May 2025, and that the prosecution evidence was primarily documentary/electronic reducing apprehension of interference, the court held that further incarceration would be disproportionate and offend Article 21 and the principle that bail is the rule absent extraordinary circumstances. Regular bail was granted subject to conditions. - HC
In a prosecution alleging creation and operation of multiple firms to wrongfully avail and pass on input tax credit exceeding ₹30 crores under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the court assessed whether continued pre-trial custody was warranted. Noting that the maximum punishment is five years, that the allegations remained to be proved, that the accused had been in custody since May 2025, and that the prosecution evidence was primarily documentary/electronic reducing apprehension of interference, the court held that further incarceration would be disproportionate and offend Article 21 and the principle that bail is the rule absent extraordinary circumstances. Regular bail was granted subject to conditions. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
