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 appellate tribunal held that the imported goods cannot be classified as hazardous waste based on the test results. The acidity, ash content, sediment, and water content were within permissible limits, and heavy metals were not detected. The goods appropriately fall under the category of 'used oil' suitable for recycling. The authorities failed to examine the parameters for determining classification as off-specification furnace oil/waste oil or hazardous waste systematically. The appellants' request for re-testing was dismissed without following due process and principles of natural justice. The evidence relied upon by the department to allege misclassification as 'fuel oil' and classification as 'hazardous waste' did not withstand legal scrutiny. The department failed to substantiate the grounds for confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeals in favor of the appellants.
The appellate tribunal held that the imported goods cannot be classified as hazardous waste based on the test results. The acidity, ash content, sediment, and water content were within permissible limits, and heavy metals were not detected. The goods appropriately fall under the category of 'used oil' suitable for recycling. The authorities failed to examine the parameters for determining classification as off-specification furnace oil/waste oil or hazardous waste systematically. The appellants' request for re-testing was dismissed without following due process and principles of natural justice. The evidence relied upon by the department to allege misclassification as 'fuel oil' and classification as 'hazardous waste' did not withstand legal scrutiny. The department failed to substantiate the grounds for confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeals in favor of the appellants.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.