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 High Court considered a case regarding the refund of terminal benefits of excise duty for deemed exports u/s Sl.No.511 of N/N.12/2012-cus. The petitioner, a successful bidder for a construction project, argued that deemed exports are entitled to the same benefits as physical exports. The court found that the petitioner was entitled to the Terminal Excise Duty (TED) as per the contract terms, supported by relevant documents. The court held that the petitioner's claim cannot be rejected solely on the grounds that the goods supplied do not qualify as deemed exports. The court quashed the impugned order, ruling in favor of the petitioner.
The High Court considered a case regarding the refund of terminal benefits of excise duty for deemed exports u/s Sl.No.511 of N/N.12/2012-cus. The petitioner, a successful bidder for a construction project, argued that deemed exports are entitled to the same benefits as physical exports. The court found that the petitioner was entitled to the Terminal Excise Duty (TED) as per the contract terms, supported by relevant documents. The court held that the petitioner's claim cannot be rejected solely on the grounds that the goods supplied do not qualify as deemed exports. The court quashed the impugned order, ruling in favor of the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
