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" ?
High Court applied section 132 CGST classifications: offences with tax evasion up to five crores are non cognizable and compoundable under section 138, while evasion exceeding five crores is cognizable and non bailable and not compoundable; a five crore deposit against an alleged evasion of Rs. 9,39,79,589/- does not convert the offence into a bailable or compoundable one, so the trial court's analogy is incorrect. The respondent offered to deposit 50% of the alleged evasion and has already deposited five crores; minimal risk of witness tampering and absence of prior misuse of bail led the High Court to dismiss the bail cancellation application.
High Court applied section 132 CGST classifications: offences with tax evasion up to five crores are non cognizable and compoundable under section 138, while evasion exceeding five crores is cognizable and non bailable and not compoundable; a five crore deposit against an alleged evasion of Rs. 9,39,79,589/- does not convert the offence into a bailable or compoundable one, so the trial court's analogy is incorrect. The respondent offered to deposit 50% of the alleged evasion and has already deposited five crores; minimal risk of witness tampering and absence of prior misuse of bail led the High Court to dismiss the bail cancellation application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
