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 CESTAT held that the appellant, who declared the description of goods to the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) for obtaining the VKGUY license, did not have any mala fide intention. The issue of classification of goods is a matter of interpretation, and the DGFT had the opportunity to object to the description declared by the appellant while issuing the license. Since the DGFT accepted the declared description and issued the license, and the license has not been canceled, the penal provisions cannot be invoked against the appellant. Consequently, the appellant is not liable for penalties u/s 112(a) or 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, and the penalties were set aside. The appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the appellant, who declared the description of goods to the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) for obtaining the VKGUY license, did not have any mala fide intention. The issue of classification of goods is a matter of interpretation, and the DGFT had the opportunity to object to the description declared by the appellant while issuing the license. Since the DGFT accepted the declared description and issued the license, and the license has not been canceled, the penal provisions cannot be invoked against the appellant. Consequently, the appellant is not liable for penalties u/s 112(a) or 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, and the penalties were set aside. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
