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 court held that u/s 110(2) of the Customs Act, a notice u/s 124(a) must be issued to the owner or concerned person within six months of seizing the goods. Failing this, the seized goods must be returned. Section 153 prescribes alternative modes for serving such notice. The petitioner attempted to show non-receipt of the 04.07.2023 email by providing a mobile inbox screenshot, but this was deemed untrustworthy evidence u/s 65-B of the Evidence Act. As the show cause notice was served via email on 04.07.2023, within six months of the 21.01.2023 seizure, the petitioner is not entitled to release of the gold bars at this stage. The writ petition was dismissed for lack of merit.
The court held that u/s 110(2) of the Customs Act, a notice u/s 124(a) must be issued to the owner or concerned person within six months of seizing the goods. Failing this, the seized goods must be returned. Section 153 prescribes alternative modes for serving such notice. The petitioner attempted to show non-receipt of the 04.07.2023 email by providing a mobile inbox screenshot, but this was deemed untrustworthy evidence u/s 65-B of the Evidence Act. As the show cause notice was served via email on 04.07.2023, within six months of the 21.01.2023 seizure, the petitioner is not entitled to release of the gold bars at this stage. The writ petition was dismissed for lack of merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
