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 appellant complied with the conditions of Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012, except for taking credit in PLA after six months from duty payment. The vehicles had passenger capacity below 13 and were registered as taxis. The procedural lapse of delayed PLA credit cannot enable rejection of refund claims when the substantive condition of vehicle use as taxi was fulfilled. The refund claims from 01.07.2017 to 27.12.2017 for clearances from January 2017 to June 2017 were filed within six months as required. The show cause notice did not allege untimely filing. The Commissioner's finding on time-bar was incorrect and legally unsustainable. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding the refund claims were not time-barred and the appellant was entitled to the duty refund under the notification.
The appellant complied with the conditions of Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012, except for taking credit in PLA after six months from duty payment. The vehicles had passenger capacity below 13 and were registered as taxis. The procedural lapse of delayed PLA credit cannot enable rejection of refund claims when the substantive condition of vehicle use as taxi was fulfilled. The refund claims from 01.07.2017 to 27.12.2017 for clearances from January 2017 to June 2017 were filed within six months as required. The show cause notice did not allege untimely filing. The Commissioner's finding on time-bar was incorrect and legally unsustainable. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding the refund claims were not time-barred and the appellant was entitled to the duty refund under the notification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
