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" ?
CESTAT dismissed appeal and application for condonation of delay of 1 year 7 months, finding no sufficient cause established. While courts generally view "sufficient cause" flexibly per Supreme Court guidelines in MST. KATIJI, each day's delay requires proper explanation. Appellant failed to provide even minimal justification for the substantial delay. Tribunal emphasized that condonation powers cannot be exercised mechanically without appropriate reasons. Following recent precedent in AJAY DABRA where SC rejected financial constraints as valid grounds, and considering AP HC's position limiting condonation beyond 90 days u/s 35(1), CESTAT concluded appellant failed to discharge obligation of demonstrating sufficient cause for delay.
CESTAT dismissed appeal and application for condonation of delay of 1 year 7 months, finding no sufficient cause established. While courts generally view "sufficient cause" flexibly per Supreme Court guidelines in MST. KATIJI, each day's delay requires proper explanation. Appellant failed to provide even minimal justification for the substantial delay. Tribunal emphasized that condonation powers cannot be exercised mechanically without appropriate reasons. Following recent precedent in AJAY DABRA where SC rejected financial constraints as valid grounds, and considering AP HC's position limiting condonation beyond 90 days u/s 35(1), CESTAT concluded appellant failed to discharge obligation of demonstrating sufficient cause for delay.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.