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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Petitioner sought declaration that it is not required to obtain NOC from Narcotics Commissioner for exporting its product containing Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK). Issue was whether the product is covered under Schedule-B of the 2013 Order, which could lead to confiscation and penalty. Court held that Customs authorities issued show-cause notice, and Petitioner will have opportunity to comment on Commissioner's opinion during adjudication. Granting declaration before adjudication would be inappropriate. Petition was filed before show-cause notice, but this is irrelevant. Writ petitions should not be entertained routinely against show-cause notices unless there is absolute lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner should respond to notice and raise all grounds, with jurisdictional issues initially adjudicated by issuing authority. Litigation against show-cause notices should not be encouraged. Petition dismissed with liberty to reply to notice and face adjudication proceedings.
Petitioner sought declaration that it is not required to obtain NOC from Narcotics Commissioner for exporting its product containing Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK). Issue was whether the product is covered under Schedule-B of the 2013 Order, which could lead to confiscation and penalty. Court held that Customs authorities issued show-cause notice, and Petitioner will have opportunity to comment on Commissioner's opinion during adjudication. Granting declaration before adjudication would be inappropriate. Petition was filed before show-cause notice, but this is irrelevant. Writ petitions should not be entertained routinely against show-cause notices unless there is absolute lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner should respond to notice and raise all grounds, with jurisdictional issues initially adjudicated by issuing authority. Litigation against show-cause notices should not be encouraged. Petition dismissed with liberty to reply to notice and face adjudication proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
