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" ?
HC ruled in favor of appellant regarding condonation of delay in customs appeal. While Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) lacked authority to condone delay beyond 30 days, CESTAT erred in dismissing the subsequent appeal filed within statutory limits. Court found compelling reasons for delay, noting appellant's pending representation before third respondent on 22.08.2007 likely caused wait before filing appeal. CESTAT's cursory dismissal failed to consider relevant parameters. Questions of law on limitation resolved favorably, with exemption issue covered by previous CESTAT Bangalore ruling supporting appellant's position. Appeal succeeded with costs throughout.
HC ruled in favor of appellant regarding condonation of delay in customs appeal. While Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) lacked authority to condone delay beyond 30 days, CESTAT erred in dismissing the subsequent appeal filed within statutory limits. Court found compelling reasons for delay, noting appellant's pending representation before third respondent on 22.08.2007 likely caused wait before filing appeal. CESTAT's cursory dismissal failed to consider relevant parameters. Questions of law on limitation resolved favorably, with exemption issue covered by previous CESTAT Bangalore ruling supporting appellant's position. Appeal succeeded with costs throughout.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
