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 claimed refund of Service Tax based on actuals and documents as per Notification 41/2012, but the claim was rejected for non-compliance with procedures/conditions in Notification 52/2011. The appellant was neither registered with Central Excise nor had registered service tax code and bank account with Customs, and did not make a declaration in the Shipping Bill. These conditions are essential for granting exemption to prevent misuse. While the Government does not burden exporters with taxes, those seeking notification benefits must comply strictly. The Supreme Court has ruled that to claim notification benefit, strict compliance with its terms is necessary, and words cannot be stretched or added. The lower authority's view rejecting the claim is reasonable, legal and proper, hence the appeal is dismissed.
The appellant claimed refund of Service Tax based on actuals and documents as per Notification 41/2012, but the claim was rejected for non-compliance with procedures/conditions in Notification 52/2011. The appellant was neither registered with Central Excise nor had registered service tax code and bank account with Customs, and did not make a declaration in the Shipping Bill. These conditions are essential for granting exemption to prevent misuse. While the Government does not burden exporters with taxes, those seeking notification benefits must comply strictly. The Supreme Court has ruled that to claim notification benefit, strict compliance with its terms is necessary, and words cannot be stretched or added. The lower authority's view rejecting the claim is reasonable, legal and proper, hence the appeal is dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
