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 HC dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking to recall the permission granted to respondent No. 3 to auction the cargo under the bills of lading and direct handover of the entire sale proceeds unconditionally. The HC held that the petitioner, as the beneficial owner and importer, had the obligation to get the goods cleared by following the prescribed customs procedures within 30 days of their arrival at ICD Wardha. The actions of respondents 1-3 in auctioning the goods due to non-clearance by the petitioner were valid, and the petitioner was liable for rent/demurrage charges u/s 150(2) of the Customs Act. The plea of fraud invoked by the petitioner required leading evidence, which is not permitted under Article 226.
The HC dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking to recall the permission granted to respondent No. 3 to auction the cargo under the bills of lading and direct handover of the entire sale proceeds unconditionally. The HC held that the petitioner, as the beneficial owner and importer, had the obligation to get the goods cleared by following the prescribed customs procedures within 30 days of their arrival at ICD Wardha. The actions of respondents 1-3 in auctioning the goods due to non-clearance by the petitioner were valid, and the petitioner was liable for rent/demurrage charges u/s 150(2) of the Customs Act. The plea of fraud invoked by the petitioner required leading evidence, which is not permitted under Article 226.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
