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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Final assessment order issued under the relevant incometax provisions without incorporating Dispute Resolution Panel directions is invalid because the transfer pricing officer has not passed any order implementing those directions; therefore the assessing officer's final order is null and void. The Tribunal held that it cannot set aside the assessment to allow the TPO to pass a future order or extend time for that purpose; consequence: assessment quashed and decision in favour of the taxpayer. Prior precedents cited include decisions recognising the requirement to incorporate DRP directions before a valid final assessment is framed.
Final assessment order issued under the relevant incometax provisions without incorporating Dispute Resolution Panel directions is invalid because the transfer pricing officer has not passed any order implementing those directions; therefore the assessing officer's final order is null and void. The Tribunal held that it cannot set aside the assessment to allow the TPO to pass a future order or extend time for that purpose; consequence: assessment quashed and decision in favour of the taxpayer. Prior precedents cited include decisions recognising the requirement to incorporate DRP directions before a valid final assessment is framed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.