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 determined that absolute confiscation of undeclared gold carried by travelers without offering redemption option violates customs regulations. While gold import is restricted and regulated, not prohibited, travelers must pay appropriate customs duty whether wearing or carrying gold ornaments. The court set aside the impugned order of absolute confiscation, holding that Section 125 of Customs Act requires authorities to offer redemption option for non-prohibited goods. Matter remitted to Joint Commissioner of Customs to determine appropriate redemption fine. Court emphasized distinction between restricted versus prohibited goods, confirming gold falls under former category requiring regulated import rather than outright prohibition.
HC determined that absolute confiscation of undeclared gold carried by travelers without offering redemption option violates customs regulations. While gold import is restricted and regulated, not prohibited, travelers must pay appropriate customs duty whether wearing or carrying gold ornaments. The court set aside the impugned order of absolute confiscation, holding that Section 125 of Customs Act requires authorities to offer redemption option for non-prohibited goods. Matter remitted to Joint Commissioner of Customs to determine appropriate redemption fine. Court emphasized distinction between restricted versus prohibited goods, confirming gold falls under former category requiring regulated import rather than outright prohibition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
