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" ?
Extended limitation under indirect tax law applies only where fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or contravention with intent to evade duty is shown, and the text treats non-disclosure of the contractual arrangement, delayed service tax payment, and suo motu credit taken instead of refund as sufficient to invoke it. It further notes that the same facts satisfy the basis for penalty under Rule 15(2) read with Section 11AC where suppression and wrongful availment of Cenvat credit are established. On that reasoning, the demand and penalty were sustained.
Extended limitation under indirect tax law applies only where fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or contravention with intent to evade duty is shown, and the text treats non-disclosure of the contractual arrangement, delayed service tax payment, and suo motu credit taken instead of refund as sufficient to invoke it. It further notes that the same facts satisfy the basis for penalty under Rule 15(2) read with Section 11AC where suppression and wrongful availment of Cenvat credit are established. On that reasoning, the demand and penalty were sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.