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 allowed the appeal and held that the appellant is eligible for refund of input services as claimed under Notification No. 41/2007-S.T. dated 06.10.2007. The time limit for filing refund claims was extended from 60 days to six months by Notification No. 32/2008-S.T. dated 18.11.2008, which has retrospective application. The substantial benefit of refund cannot be denied merely on procedural grounds of filing claims beyond 60 days for invoices relating to the relevant quarter. The CESTAT relied on its earlier decision in Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Jamshedpur v. M/s Rungta Mines Ltd.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal and held that the appellant is eligible for refund of input services as claimed under Notification No. 41/2007-S.T. dated 06.10.2007. The time limit for filing refund claims was extended from 60 days to six months by Notification No. 32/2008-S.T. dated 18.11.2008, which has retrospective application. The substantial benefit of refund cannot be denied merely on procedural grounds of filing claims beyond 60 days for invoices relating to the relevant quarter. The CESTAT relied on its earlier decision in Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Jamshedpur v. M/s Rungta Mines Ltd.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.