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" ?
The HC held that a post-import obligation under an exemption notification may continue after rescission, and Section 159A can preserve action despite withdrawal or modification of the notification, but only within the statutory limitation period. Proceedings for confiscation, fine in lieu of confiscation, and penalty remained subject to Section 28 limitation. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond five years from the relevant date, the penal proceedings were time-barred and could not be sustained. The court distinguished the cited precedent on the ground that the notice there had been issued within time.
The HC held that a post-import obligation under an exemption notification may continue after rescission, and Section 159A can preserve action despite withdrawal or modification of the notification, but only within the statutory limitation period. Proceedings for confiscation, fine in lieu of confiscation, and penalty remained subject to Section 28 limitation. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond five years from the relevant date, the penal proceedings were time-barred and could not be sustained. The court distinguished the cited precedent on the ground that the notice there had been issued within time.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.