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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Provisional attachment under the 2002 Act can extend to persons not named as accused in the FIR or chargesheet if the property is linked to proceeds of crime and the person is shown as a recipient or holder of such proceeds. The Tribunal rejected the challenge based solely on non-inclusion in the predicate offence. It also held that the appellants failed to prove the lawful source of more than Rs. 10 crore remitted through banking channels and used for property purchases, and that contemporaneous SMS and purchase records supported the money-trail. The plea that some properties were acquired before the murder did not defeat equivalent value attachment, and the attachment was upheld.
Provisional attachment under the 2002 Act can extend to persons not named as accused in the FIR or chargesheet if the property is linked to proceeds of crime and the person is shown as a recipient or holder of such proceeds. The Tribunal rejected the challenge based solely on non-inclusion in the predicate offence. It also held that the appellants failed to prove the lawful source of more than Rs. 10 crore remitted through banking channels and used for property purchases, and that contemporaneous SMS and purchase records supported the money-trail. The plea that some properties were acquired before the murder did not defeat equivalent value attachment, and the attachment was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.