Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Page of 4824
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 96463 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
This case deals with the applicability of customs duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus for imports made before and after its amendment by Notification No. 06/2017-Cus, and the applicability of depreciation provisions under Clause (e) of Condition 40A post-amendment. The key points are: Prior to the amendment, the exemption was available without any depreciation clause, as per the CLOUGH ENGINEERING LTD. case. After the amendment, duty became payable on leftover goods with prescribed depreciation rates. The confiscation demand and penalties were set aside, as the notification itself foresaw the possibility of leftovers and disposal. The case was remanded for fresh adjudication considering the depreciation provisions for post-amendment imports.
This case deals with the applicability of customs duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus for imports made before and after its amendment by Notification No. 06/2017-Cus, and the applicability of depreciation provisions under Clause (e) of Condition 40A post-amendment. The key points are: Prior to the amendment, the exemption was available without any depreciation clause, as per the CLOUGH ENGINEERING LTD. case. After the amendment, duty became payable on leftover goods with prescribed depreciation rates. The confiscation demand and penalties were set aside, as the notification itself foresaw the possibility of leftovers and disposal. The case was remanded for fresh adjudication considering the depreciation provisions for post-amendment imports.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
