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 the appellant regarding customs duty refund claims from 2014-2015. While initial refunds were granted, subsequent litigation reached SC, which established in ITC Limited case that refunds require modified assessment orders under Section 128 of Customs Act. HC determined appeals were timely filed within 90 days of ITC judgment. The court rejected the limitation argument, considering Section 14 applicable since ITC fundamentally changed refund basis. Delay was deemed condonable given the legal evolution of refund requirements through judicial precedents. The court emphasized that previous adjudication had not raised timing issues between bills of entry and refund applications, making that period irrelevant for current appeal timing calculations.
HC ruled in favor of the appellant regarding customs duty refund claims from 2014-2015. While initial refunds were granted, subsequent litigation reached SC, which established in ITC Limited case that refunds require modified assessment orders under Section 128 of Customs Act. HC determined appeals were timely filed within 90 days of ITC judgment. The court rejected the limitation argument, considering Section 14 applicable since ITC fundamentally changed refund basis. Delay was deemed condonable given the legal evolution of refund requirements through judicial precedents. The court emphasized that previous adjudication had not raised timing issues between bills of entry and refund applications, making that period irrelevant for current appeal timing calculations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.