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 dismissed appeals concerning interest claims on refunded CENVAT credit. The appellant reversed credit following show cause notices but without written protest. Though partial credit was later allowed per Tribunal's order dated 04.07.2011, the reversed amount was deemed appropriated as duty payment, not a revenue deposit. The reversal constituted appropriation since it matched the amount proposed in show cause notices. As refunds were processed within the statutory three-month period, no interest liability arose under Section 11BB. The Tribunal distinguished from Pricol Ltd precedent, noting absence of protest during reversal. The amounts were treated as appropriated duty payments rather than deposits under protest, making interest claims untenable.
CESTAT dismissed appeals concerning interest claims on refunded CENVAT credit. The appellant reversed credit following show cause notices but without written protest. Though partial credit was later allowed per Tribunal's order dated 04.07.2011, the reversed amount was deemed appropriated as duty payment, not a revenue deposit. The reversal constituted appropriation since it matched the amount proposed in show cause notices. As refunds were processed within the statutory three-month period, no interest liability arose under Section 11BB. The Tribunal distinguished from Pricol Ltd precedent, noting absence of protest during reversal. The amounts were treated as appropriated duty payments rather than deposits under protest, making interest claims untenable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
