Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Imported zircon sand was treated as zirconium ore concentrate, not ore, because the classification turned on Chapter Notes, HSN Explanatory Notes and the treatment applied to the mined material, not merely metal content. The exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-CE was therefore unavailable, and the differential duty with interest was upheld under strict construction of exemption notifications. The challenge based on denial of cross-examination of the chemical examiner failed because no prejudice was shown and the report was not the sole basis of decision. Penalty was set aside, as the dispute was interpretational and did not warrant penal action.
Imported zircon sand was treated as zirconium ore concentrate, not ore, because the classification turned on Chapter Notes, HSN Explanatory Notes and the treatment applied to the mined material, not merely metal content. The exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-CE was therefore unavailable, and the differential duty with interest was upheld under strict construction of exemption notifications. The challenge based on denial of cross-examination of the chemical examiner failed because no prejudice was shown and the report was not the sole basis of decision. Penalty was set aside, as the dispute was interpretational and did not warrant penal action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
