Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
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...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Conversion of shipping bills - conversion from Draw Back Scheme to Advance License Scheme - The Tribunal examined the provisions of Circular No. 36/2010 and concluded that while conversion from more rigorous to less rigorous examination schemes was permitted, the reverse was not allowed. Since the appellants sought conversion to a scheme involving more rigorous examination after availing benefits under the Drawback Scheme, their request was denied. The CESTAT upheld the validity of condition 3(e) of the circular, which precluded conversion after availing benefits under a particular scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the lower authority.
Conversion of shipping bills - conversion from Draw Back Scheme to Advance License Scheme - The Tribunal examined the provisions of Circular No. 36/2010 and concluded that while conversion from more rigorous to less rigorous examination schemes was permitted, the reverse was not allowed. Since the appellants sought conversion to a scheme involving more rigorous examination after availing benefits under the Drawback Scheme, their request was denied. The CESTAT upheld the validity of condition 3(e) of the circular, which precluded conversion after availing benefits under a particular scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the lower authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.