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, engaged in manufacturing stainless steel coils under the Advance Authorisation Scheme, challenged the adjudicating authority's rejection of their refund claim for Countervailing Duty (CVD). The Government initially imposed CVD but later exempted it through Notification No. 79/2017-Cus dated 13.10.2017 and DGFT Notification No. 33/2015-2020. Various High Courts upheld the retrospective applicability of Notification No. 79/2017 in similar cases. However, the refund was denied on the grounds that the appellant was not a party in those High Court cases. The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant is entitled to a refund of CVD along with applicable interest, as Notification No. 79/2017 has retrospective effect, granting exemption from CVD under the Advance Authorisation Scheme.
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing stainless steel coils under the Advance Authorisation Scheme, challenged the adjudicating authority's rejection of their refund claim for Countervailing Duty (CVD). The Government initially imposed CVD but later exempted it through Notification No. 79/2017-Cus dated 13.10.2017 and DGFT Notification No. 33/2015-2020. Various High Courts upheld the retrospective applicability of Notification No. 79/2017 in similar cases. However, the refund was denied on the grounds that the appellant was not a party in those High Court cases. The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant is entitled to a refund of CVD along with applicable interest, as Notification No. 79/2017 has retrospective effect, granting exemption from CVD under the Advance Authorisation Scheme.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
