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" ?
Refund of EDD - Period of limitation - Appellant unaware of finalisation of bills of entry - The Appellate Tribunal notes that neither the original authority nor subsequent communications mentioned the actual date of finalization of the bills of entry. This absence of crucial information places the burden on the revenue to prove the date of communication of the Order in Original. Due to the lack of evidence from the revenue establishing the actual date of communication of the Order in Original, the Tribunal finds no grounds to support the claim that the appellant's application for refund was time-barred.
Refund of EDD - Period of limitation - Appellant unaware of finalisation of bills of entry - The Appellate Tribunal notes that neither the original authority nor subsequent communications mentioned the actual date of finalization of the bills of entry. This absence of crucial information places the burden on the revenue to prove the date of communication of the Order in Original. Due to the lack of evidence from the revenue establishing the actual date of communication of the Order in Original, the Tribunal finds no grounds to support the claim that the appellant's application for refund was time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.