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" ?
Admissibility of electronic evidence: The Tribunal held that digital images reproduced in the assessment order lacked requisite legal sanctity because the s.65B certificate and CBDT Manual protocols were not complied with - no officer's attestation of seizure, no documented chain of custody, absence of device identifiers (IMEI) linkage to hash values, and no proof that master/working copies analyzed matched the certified hashes. For failure to establish proper custody, provenance and evidentiary parity under s.65B and forensic guidelines, the electronic evidence was treated as unverifiable and inadmissible; grounds challenging the additions were allowed. - ITAT
Admissibility of electronic evidence: The Tribunal held that digital images reproduced in the assessment order lacked requisite legal sanctity because the s.65B certificate and CBDT Manual protocols were not complied with - no officer's attestation of seizure, no documented chain of custody, absence of device identifiers (IMEI) linkage to hash values, and no proof that master/working copies analyzed matched the certified hashes. For failure to establish proper custody, provenance and evidentiary parity under s.65B and forensic guidelines, the electronic evidence was treated as unverifiable and inadmissible; grounds challenging the additions were allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.