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 appellants' activity of processing raw materials/forged blastings received from M/s. Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd. into 'Gear 4th Platina' amounted to manufacture u/s 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The processes undertaken imparted a lasting change, resulting in a new product with a distinct identity. Consequently, the demand of service tax alleging the job work to be Business Auxiliary Service was set aside. The CESTAT further held that there was no suppression of facts or intention to evade tax payment by the appellants, as their activity did not attract service tax liability. Thus, invoking the extended period of limitation was incorrect. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.
The CESTAT held that the appellants' activity of processing raw materials/forged blastings received from M/s. Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd. into 'Gear 4th Platina' amounted to manufacture u/s 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The processes undertaken imparted a lasting change, resulting in a new product with a distinct identity. Consequently, the demand of service tax alleging the job work to be Business Auxiliary Service was set aside. The CESTAT further held that there was no suppression of facts or intention to evade tax payment by the appellants, as their activity did not attract service tax liability. Thus, invoking the extended period of limitation was incorrect. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.