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 ruled imported drawings and designs are correctly classifiable under CTH 49.06, not CTH 84.19. The tribunal determined these were original computer-printed drawings supplied separately from the ETP equipment, relating to post-import activities. The value should not be included in ETP's assessable value u/r 10(1)(b)(iv) of Customs Valuation Rules. The drawings qualified for duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at nil rate. Revenue's contention that drawings constituted pre-import activity was rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) order was upheld and Revenue's appeal dismissed. The classification decision turned on the independent nature of the drawings rather than their connection to subsequently imported equipment.
CESTAT ruled imported drawings and designs are correctly classifiable under CTH 49.06, not CTH 84.19. The tribunal determined these were original computer-printed drawings supplied separately from the ETP equipment, relating to post-import activities. The value should not be included in ETP's assessable value u/r 10(1)(b)(iv) of Customs Valuation Rules. The drawings qualified for duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at nil rate. Revenue's contention that drawings constituted pre-import activity was rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) order was upheld and Revenue's appeal dismissed. The classification decision turned on the independent nature of the drawings rather than their connection to subsequently imported equipment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
