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" ?
Pending constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal, the Court held that recovery of outstanding GST dues was governed by the existing CBIC circular and the statutory pre-deposit mechanism under section 112 of the CGST Act. It disposed of the writ petitions without examining the merits of the input tax credit dispute, and granted the petitioner liberty to secure continued stay of recovery by filing the prescribed undertaking before the jurisdictional proper officer and making the required pre-deposit within the time allowed. If that deposit was not made, the protection under the order would lapse and recovery of the balance demand could proceed.
Pending constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal, the Court held that recovery of outstanding GST dues was governed by the existing CBIC circular and the statutory pre-deposit mechanism under section 112 of the CGST Act. It disposed of the writ petitions without examining the merits of the input tax credit dispute, and granted the petitioner liberty to secure continued stay of recovery by filing the prescribed undertaking before the jurisdictional proper officer and making the required pre-deposit within the time allowed. If that deposit was not made, the protection under the order would lapse and recovery of the balance demand could proceed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.