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" ?
Prior approval for search assessments was treated as a substantive jurisdictional safeguard, so the approving authority had to apply an independent mind to the appraisal report, seized material and assessment records for each year. The ITAT majority found that the Addl. CIT relied only on what the Assessing Officer stated, issued identically worded approvals for multiple years, and did not demonstrate any real examination of the relevant material. Such mechanical and non-speaking approval could not substitute the statutory requirement, and the assessments based on it were held unsustainable and quashed.
Prior approval for search assessments was treated as a substantive jurisdictional safeguard, so the approving authority had to apply an independent mind to the appraisal report, seized material and assessment records for each year. The ITAT majority found that the Addl. CIT relied only on what the Assessing Officer stated, issued identically worded approvals for multiple years, and did not demonstrate any real examination of the relevant material. Such mechanical and non-speaking approval could not substitute the statutory requirement, and the assessments based on it were held unsustainable and quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.