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" ?
Initial defect in authorization to prosecute under the Negotiable Instruments regime is a curable defect; a company acts through natural persons and a complaint stating prima facie that an authorised employee represents the company and has knowledge is sufficient for cognizance. Where authorization is disputed on serious factual grounds the accused may raise the issue at trial and the Magistrate should not dismiss at threshold; invocation of inherent jurisdiction to quash such cognizance is unjustified. Subsequent ratification or board resolution may validate the complaint and additional evidence to that effect was rightly permitted.
Initial defect in authorization to prosecute under the Negotiable Instruments regime is a curable defect; a company acts through natural persons and a complaint stating prima facie that an authorised employee represents the company and has knowledge is sufficient for cognizance. Where authorization is disputed on serious factual grounds the accused may raise the issue at trial and the Magistrate should not dismiss at threshold; invocation of inherent jurisdiction to quash such cognizance is unjustified. Subsequent ratification or board resolution may validate the complaint and additional evidence to that effect was rightly permitted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.