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" ?
Refund for excess customs duty paid by filing an application for amendment of the bill of entry u/ss 149 or 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was held that a refund u/s 27 can only be granted if the assessment is modified u/s 128 or other relevant provisions. Sections 149 and 154 allow for amendment of documents or correction of clerical errors, respectively. If review is limited to Section 128, other provisions like Sections 149, 154, and 28 (for recovering short-paid duty) would become redundant. Even for self-assessed bills of entry, importers can seek amendment u/s 149. However, in this case, no request was made initially for rectification or amendment u/s 149 or 154. The adjudication authority rightly rejected the refund claim based on the Supreme Court's judgment in ITC Ltd. The appellate authority erred in not considering the proper officer's power to allow corrections u/s 149, as no other objections were raised regarding amending the bill of entry to avail the benefit of the correct notification.
Refund for excess customs duty paid by filing an application for amendment of the bill of entry u/ss 149 or 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was held that a refund u/s 27 can only be granted if the assessment is modified u/s 128 or other relevant provisions. Sections 149 and 154 allow for amendment of documents or correction of clerical errors, respectively. If review is limited to Section 128, other provisions like Sections 149, 154, and 28 (for recovering short-paid duty) would become redundant. Even for self-assessed bills of entry, importers can seek amendment u/s 149. However, in this case, no request was made initially for rectification or amendment u/s 149 or 154. The adjudication authority rightly rejected the refund claim based on the Supreme Court's judgment in ITC Ltd. The appellate authority erred in not considering the proper officer's power to allow corrections u/s 149, as no other objections were raised regarding amending the bill of entry to avail the benefit of the correct notification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.