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" ?
Faceless assessment scheme does not absorb the statutory preliminary inquiry procedure for reopening; the scheme's plain language excludes that inquiry process, so a notice to reopen may validly be issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer where the requisite inquiry and order were made by that officer. Reading the faceless scheme to incorporate the preliminary inquiry would alter the scheme and render issuance by a faceless officer meaningless. Conflicting views from other High Courts were noted, but the conclusion here is that automated allocation may trigger notice issuance while reassessment proceedings may proceed facelessly; notices issued by jurisdictional officers after April 2022 are upheld as valid.
Faceless assessment scheme does not absorb the statutory preliminary inquiry procedure for reopening; the scheme's plain language excludes that inquiry process, so a notice to reopen may validly be issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer where the requisite inquiry and order were made by that officer. Reading the faceless scheme to incorporate the preliminary inquiry would alter the scheme and render issuance by a faceless officer meaningless. Conflicting views from other High Courts were noted, but the conclusion here is that automated allocation may trigger notice issuance while reassessment proceedings may proceed facelessly; notices issued by jurisdictional officers after April 2022 are upheld as valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.