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" ?
Undervaluation of goods - FOS and Sucralose when cleared to related parties and M/s Surya Herbals by not following CAS-4 valuation method as provided u/r 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Held that Rule 8 would apply only where entire production of a commodity is captively consumed. Rule 8 provisions will not apply where some parts are sold to independent buyers. In situations where both Rule 4 and Rule 8 apply, by sequential order, Rule 4 takes precedence over Rule 8 for determination consistent with Section 4(8) Central Excise Act, 1944. No evidence of cost comparison or comparable market price provided to show undervaluation. Demand of duty cannot sustain and requires to be set aside. Impugned order set aside. Appeal allowed.
Undervaluation of goods - FOS and Sucralose when cleared to related parties and M/s Surya Herbals by not following CAS-4 valuation method as provided u/r 8 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Held that Rule 8 would apply only where entire production of a commodity is captively consumed. Rule 8 provisions will not apply where some parts are sold to independent buyers. In situations where both Rule 4 and Rule 8 apply, by sequential order, Rule 4 takes precedence over Rule 8 for determination consistent with Section 4(8) Central Excise Act, 1944. No evidence of cost comparison or comparable market price provided to show undervaluation. Demand of duty cannot sustain and requires to be set aside. Impugned order set aside. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.