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" ?
Mis-declaration of value of imported goods - No evidence is on record that the any payment over and above the contracted, and declared, price was made to the seller. The allegation hinges on the said transaction price being on Free on Board (FOB) terms while duties of customs are to be computed on value appraised on Cost Insurance Freight (CIF) terms. The authority for adoption of the base arises from rule 10 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 which is not a consequence of rejection of declared value attended upon by re-determination through rule 4 to rule 9 of the said Rules. Recourse to confiscation under section 111(m) of Customs Act, 1962 is, therefore, not tenable in law. - AT
Mis-declaration of value of imported goods - No evidence is on record that the any payment over and above the contracted, and declared, price was made to the seller. The allegation hinges on the said transaction price being on Free on Board (FOB) terms while duties of customs are to be computed on value appraised on Cost Insurance Freight (CIF) terms. The authority for adoption of the base arises from rule 10 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 which is not a consequence of rejection of declared value attended upon by re-determination through rule 4 to rule 9 of the said Rules. Recourse to confiscation under section 111(m) of Customs Act, 1962 is, therefore, not tenable in law. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
