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" ?
HC held that denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the assessment where the proceedings under section 153C were founded on seized loose sheets recovered during search, not on the statement of the person whose cross-examination was sought. Applying Andaman Timber Industries, the Court found that the statement was only corroborative and was not used as the basis of the assessment or penalty. As the impugned orders rested on seized material and not on the disputed statement, no procedural irregularity or breach of natural justice was made out. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.
HC held that denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the assessment where the proceedings under section 153C were founded on seized loose sheets recovered during search, not on the statement of the person whose cross-examination was sought. Applying Andaman Timber Industries, the Court found that the statement was only corroborative and was not used as the basis of the assessment or penalty. As the impugned orders rested on seized material and not on the disputed statement, no procedural irregularity or breach of natural justice was made out. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.