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 challenge to an order alleging fraudulent availment of ITC passed without personal hearing, the Court held that such disputes typically involve complex fact and evidence, making writ intervention inappropriate where an efficacious statutory appeal exists; accordingly, it declined to set aside the order on writ merits. Given that the order was received long before the writ was filed and the appeal period had lapsed, the Court nonetheless protected the right to appeal by directing that if an appeal is filed with the requisite pre-deposit by the specified date, it shall not be rejected as time-barred and must be decided on merits; the writ was disposed of. - HC
In a challenge to an order alleging fraudulent availment of ITC passed without personal hearing, the Court held that such disputes typically involve complex fact and evidence, making writ intervention inappropriate where an efficacious statutory appeal exists; accordingly, it declined to set aside the order on writ merits. Given that the order was received long before the writ was filed and the appeal period had lapsed, the Court nonetheless protected the right to appeal by directing that if an appeal is filed with the requisite pre-deposit by the specified date, it shall not be rejected as time-barred and must be decided on merits; the writ was disposed of. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.