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" ?
Section 74 of the GST Act cannot be invoked without material showing fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade tax; where the taxpayer reversed the disputed input tax credit before notice and the Revenue showed no conscious involvement in any fraudulent arrangement, the proceedings were held unsustainable. Interest under Section 50 was also refused because wrongly availed credit had been reversed before the show cause notice and the Electronic Credit Ledger retained surplus balance, so utilisation was not established. A further demand and penalty on the same reversal was treated as double taxation and beyond jurisdiction, and the impugned orders were quashed.
Section 74 of the GST Act cannot be invoked without material showing fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade tax; where the taxpayer reversed the disputed input tax credit before notice and the Revenue showed no conscious involvement in any fraudulent arrangement, the proceedings were held unsustainable. Interest under Section 50 was also refused because wrongly availed credit had been reversed before the show cause notice and the Electronic Credit Ledger retained surplus balance, so utilisation was not established. A further demand and penalty on the same reversal was treated as double taxation and beyond jurisdiction, and the impugned orders were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.