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" ?
Maintainability of appeal before the Tribunal - non-fulfillment of the condition of pre-deposit of 7.5% of the duty subject to the amount specified in the first proviso to Section 35(F) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Since the Order-in-Original itself is dated 29th November, 2017, i.e., much after Section 35F has been amended with effect from 6th August, 2014, the Petitioner cannot avail a benefit of second proviso to Section 35F Act (post amendment). - Considering the fact that the Petitioner has deposited the amount as condition for entertainment of appeal as required, no coercive measure for recovery of the rest of the demand raised shall be taken - HC
Maintainability of appeal before the Tribunal - non-fulfillment of the condition of pre-deposit of 7.5% of the duty subject to the amount specified in the first proviso to Section 35(F) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Since the Order-in-Original itself is dated 29th November, 2017, i.e., much after Section 35F has been amended with effect from 6th August, 2014, the Petitioner cannot avail a benefit of second proviso to Section 35F Act (post amendment). - Considering the fact that the Petitioner has deposited the amount as condition for entertainment of appeal as required, no coercive measure for recovery of the rest of the demand raised shall be taken - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
