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 demand for recovery of Cenvat Credit was made without proper verification and investigation, based on assumptions and presumptions. The investigation covered only 67 out of 245 transactions, and the findings cannot be generalized to the remaining 178 transactions, vitiating the proceedings. The demand of Rs.1,00,55,148 is set aside. For 32 invoices, the recorded statements from vehicle owners are unreliable as they were taken 1-5 years after the transactions, and cross-examination was not granted. The confirmed demand of Rs.18,69,286 is set aside. The information from the Vahan Department cannot conclusively establish that the vehicles were not used for delivery. The extended period of limitation is not sustainable as there is no evidence of suppression by the assessee, who is a regular filer of returns. The entire demand is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.
The demand for recovery of Cenvat Credit was made without proper verification and investigation, based on assumptions and presumptions. The investigation covered only 67 out of 245 transactions, and the findings cannot be generalized to the remaining 178 transactions, vitiating the proceedings. The demand of Rs.1,00,55,148 is set aside. For 32 invoices, the recorded statements from vehicle owners are unreliable as they were taken 1-5 years after the transactions, and cross-examination was not granted. The confirmed demand of Rs.18,69,286 is set aside. The information from the Vahan Department cannot conclusively establish that the vehicles were not used for delivery. The extended period of limitation is not sustainable as there is no evidence of suppression by the assessee, who is a regular filer of returns. The entire demand is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.