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" ?
The case before CESTAT Bangalore involved a refund claim for Service Tax paid under protest for Consultancy Services received from abroad under reverse charge mechanism. The respondent deposited the tax, interest, and penalty within the prescribed time period. The absence of evidence showing payments made under protest led to the claim being considered time-barred. The respondent had paid the tax based on an audit letter and had informed the authorities accordingly. As the tax was paid under the relevant provisions without any mistake of law. The decision upheld the provisions of u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appeal by the Revenue was allowed.
The case before CESTAT Bangalore involved a refund claim for Service Tax paid under protest for Consultancy Services received from abroad under reverse charge mechanism. The respondent deposited the tax, interest, and penalty within the prescribed time period. The absence of evidence showing payments made under protest led to the claim being considered time-barred. The respondent had paid the tax based on an audit letter and had informed the authorities accordingly. As the tax was paid under the relevant provisions without any mistake of law. The decision upheld the provisions of u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appeal by the Revenue was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.