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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
Statutory appeals were rejected as time-barred because the delay exceeded the condonable period, and the High Court found no legal basis to interfere with that appellate rejection. The dispute concerned GST assessment orders arising from return mismatches, with intimations already issued, so no further interference was warranted on that record. However, on the petitioners' express consent, the Court directed fresh adjudication on merits after payment of the balance disputed tax or required disputed tax, as applicable, and filing replies with supporting documents; the impugned orders were treated as addenda to the show cause notices. Any bank attachment was to stand vacated only upon compliance with those conditions.
Statutory appeals were rejected as time-barred because the delay exceeded the condonable period, and the High Court found no legal basis to interfere with that appellate rejection. The dispute concerned GST assessment orders arising from return mismatches, with intimations already issued, so no further interference was warranted on that record. However, on the petitioners' express consent, the Court directed fresh adjudication on merits after payment of the balance disputed tax or required disputed tax, as applicable, and filing replies with supporting documents; the impugned orders were treated as addenda to the show cause notices. Any bank attachment was to stand vacated only upon compliance with those conditions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.