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 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act do not bar a common or consolidated show cause notice for more than one tax period or financial year. The Court held that the references to "any period" and the limitation provisions do not confine notice issuance to a single financial year, while each component of a consolidated notice must still independently satisfy the applicable limitation test. It also rejected the objection based on pecuniary jurisdiction of the proper officer. Where Orders-in-Original were challenged, the Court restored the statutory position and granted time to file appeals, with limitation objections not to be raised if appeals were filed within the period allowed.
Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act do not bar a common or consolidated show cause notice for more than one tax period or financial year. The Court held that the references to "any period" and the limitation provisions do not confine notice issuance to a single financial year, while each component of a consolidated notice must still independently satisfy the applicable limitation test. It also rejected the objection based on pecuniary jurisdiction of the proper officer. Where Orders-in-Original were challenged, the Court restored the statutory position and granted time to file appeals, with limitation objections not to be raised if appeals were filed within the period allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.