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 that Notification No. 36/2021-Customs amending N/N. 45/2017-Customs cannot have retrospective effect. The amendment substituted "duty of customs" with "Said duty, tax or cess" for re-imported goods, creating new liability for integrated tax payment. While Explanation (d) claimed to clarify existing provisions, it effectively imposed additional tax obligations not present in the original notification. The Tribunal determined that since the amendment altered substantive tax liability rather than merely clarifying existing provisions, and lacked explicit retrospective application language under Section 25(4) of Customs Act, it could only apply prospectively from publication date. Prior CBIC circular suggesting retrospective application was deemed legally unsustainable.
CESTAT ruled that Notification No. 36/2021-Customs amending N/N. 45/2017-Customs cannot have retrospective effect. The amendment substituted "duty of customs" with "Said duty, tax or cess" for re-imported goods, creating new liability for integrated tax payment. While Explanation (d) claimed to clarify existing provisions, it effectively imposed additional tax obligations not present in the original notification. The Tribunal determined that since the amendment altered substantive tax liability rather than merely clarifying existing provisions, and lacked explicit retrospective application language under Section 25(4) of Customs Act, it could only apply prospectively from publication date. Prior CBIC circular suggesting retrospective application was deemed legally unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.