Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
721 to 740 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reimbursement of actual staff salary cost from a project office to its head office, with no mark-up, was treated as a payment to self because both formed parts of the same enterprise. On that reasoning, no taxable income arose from the internal allocation, and the amount could not be assessed separately as fees for technical services. The Tribunal followed its earlier view that a transaction between the project office and head office did not generate income in the absence of any element of profit. The addition was deleted for both assessment years.
Reimbursement of actual staff salary cost from a project office to its head office, with no mark-up, was treated as a payment to self because both formed parts of the same enterprise. On that reasoning, no taxable income arose from the internal allocation, and the amount could not be assessed separately as fees for technical services. The Tribunal followed its earlier view that a transaction between the project office and head office did not generate income in the absence of any element of profit. The addition was deleted for both assessment years.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.