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" ?
Assessment proceedings and consequent demand and penalty notices issued in the name of an amalgamating/transferor company are void once a court-sanctioned scheme of amalgamation has taken effect because the transferor ceases to exist; continuing proceedings in the name of the dissolved entity therefore involve a jurisdictional error. The High Court applied the principle that proceedings must be in the name of the existing legal entity, relied on prior authoritative decisions (distinguishing contrary facts), and quashed the impugned notices and order while noting the Revenue may initiate fresh proceedings against the amalgamated company if legally entitled.
Assessment proceedings and consequent demand and penalty notices issued in the name of an amalgamating/transferor company are void once a court-sanctioned scheme of amalgamation has taken effect because the transferor ceases to exist; continuing proceedings in the name of the dissolved entity therefore involve a jurisdictional error. The High Court applied the principle that proceedings must be in the name of the existing legal entity, relied on prior authoritative decisions (distinguishing contrary facts), and quashed the impugned notices and order while noting the Revenue may initiate fresh proceedings against the amalgamated company if legally entitled.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
