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" ?
Customs broker's license revocation and forfeiture of security deposit due to alleged overvaluation of imported rough diamonds faced procedural irregularities. CESTAT observed respondent's request for cross-examination of persons whose statements implicated respondent was denied without specific grounds, violating principles of natural justice and Regulation 17(4) of CBLR requiring reasons for denial. CESTAT noted allegations of telephonic conversations lacked evidence of respondent's active role in overvaluation. Department failed to comply with CBLR provisions when cross-examination was requested, forming the sole ground for allowing appeal. Neither proposed questions nor grounds raised this issue, leading to appeal dismissal.
Customs broker's license revocation and forfeiture of security deposit due to alleged overvaluation of imported rough diamonds faced procedural irregularities. CESTAT observed respondent's request for cross-examination of persons whose statements implicated respondent was denied without specific grounds, violating principles of natural justice and Regulation 17(4) of CBLR requiring reasons for denial. CESTAT noted allegations of telephonic conversations lacked evidence of respondent's active role in overvaluation. Department failed to comply with CBLR provisions when cross-examination was requested, forming the sole ground for allowing appeal. Neither proposed questions nor grounds raised this issue, leading to appeal dismissal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.