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" ?
Writ jurisdiction remained available despite an appellate remedy because the challenge alleged violation of natural justice through a non-speaking order. The High Court held that the alternative remedy rule is not absolute and does not bar writ intervention where reasons are absent, jurisdiction is lacking, vires is questioned, or fundamental rights are implicated. Here, the adjudicating authority had noted receipt of the reply but failed to deal with its contents or the supporting documents, and gave no reasons for rejection. The GST demand order was therefore set aside as a non-speaking order, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after personal hearing and a reasoned decision.
Writ jurisdiction remained available despite an appellate remedy because the challenge alleged violation of natural justice through a non-speaking order. The High Court held that the alternative remedy rule is not absolute and does not bar writ intervention where reasons are absent, jurisdiction is lacking, vires is questioned, or fundamental rights are implicated. Here, the adjudicating authority had noted receipt of the reply but failed to deal with its contents or the supporting documents, and gave no reasons for rejection. The GST demand order was therefore set aside as a non-speaking order, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after personal hearing and a reasoned decision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.