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" ?
Penalty proceedings against a licensee of a Special Warehouse under section 58A were invalidated because they were initiated under generic Warehouse Regulations instead of the Special Warehouse Regulations that govern section 58A licensees; reliance on an audit report that was not supplied to the licensee and commencement of proceedings nearly five years after surrender and acceptance of the licence further vitiated the case. The combination of incorrect regulatory basis, non-disclosure of the foundational audit document and inordinate delay rendered the penalty order unsustainable, and remand was refused in favor of quashing the order.
Penalty proceedings against a licensee of a Special Warehouse under section 58A were invalidated because they were initiated under generic Warehouse Regulations instead of the Special Warehouse Regulations that govern section 58A licensees; reliance on an audit report that was not supplied to the licensee and commencement of proceedings nearly five years after surrender and acceptance of the licence further vitiated the case. The combination of incorrect regulatory basis, non-disclosure of the foundational audit document and inordinate delay rendered the penalty order unsustainable, and remand was refused in favor of quashing the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.