Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Data transmission equipment classification under CTSH 8517 62 remains distinct from residual classification, with exemption evidence requiring scrutin...
Under Section 75(4), an adverse determination could not be made without affording the taxpayer a hearing, and the obligation remained even if the response to the show cause notice was filed late. The High Court found that no personal hearing had been given and the alleged communication relied on by the State was not available on the portal, so the assessment order under Section 73(9) suffered from breach of the mandatory hearing requirement. The order was set aside, and the officer was directed to restore limited portal access, accept the response, and decide the matter afresh after granting hearing in accordance with law.
Under Section 75(4), an adverse determination could not be made without affording the taxpayer a hearing, and the obligation remained even if the response to the show cause notice was filed late. The High Court found that no personal hearing had been given and the alleged communication relied on by the State was not available on the portal, so the assessment order under Section 73(9) suffered from breach of the mandatory hearing requirement. The order was set aside, and the officer was directed to restore limited portal access, accept the response, and decide the matter afresh after granting hearing in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
