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" ?
Reversal of CENVAT Credit - The appellant has been availing CENVAT credit only on the proportionate amount of inputs which are gone into manufacture of either dutiable goods or in the manufacture of exempted goods which are exported. Therefore, there is no availment of common input credit. - Further, here goods are exported, direction by revenue to the petitioner to pay 10% of sale price of exempted goods u/r 6(3)(b) is not justified - AT
Reversal of CENVAT Credit - The appellant has been availing CENVAT credit only on the proportionate amount of inputs which are gone into manufacture of either dutiable goods or in the manufacture of exempted goods which are exported. Therefore, there is no availment of common input credit. - Further, here goods are exported, direction by revenue to the petitioner to pay 10% of sale price of exempted goods u/r 6(3)(b) is not justified - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.