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 held that imported Mixed Hydrocarbon Oil was correctly classified under CTI 27011990, not as Automotive Diesel Fuel under CTI 27101944. CRCL laboratory testing confirmed the product did not meet IS:1460:2005 standards for automotive diesel. The tribunal emphasized that classification burden lies with Revenue per SC precedent in H.P.L. Chemicals. Appellant's admission under investigation cannot alone determine classification without corroborating evidence. Department failed to substantiate misclassification allegations with legally admissible evidence. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the original classification order, confirming goods as Mixed Hydrocarbon Oil under CTI 27011990.
CESTAT held that imported Mixed Hydrocarbon Oil was correctly classified under CTI 27011990, not as Automotive Diesel Fuel under CTI 27101944. CRCL laboratory testing confirmed the product did not meet IS:1460:2005 standards for automotive diesel. The tribunal emphasized that classification burden lies with Revenue per SC precedent in H.P.L. Chemicals. Appellant's admission under investigation cannot alone determine classification without corroborating evidence. Department failed to substantiate misclassification allegations with legally admissible evidence. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the original classification order, confirming goods as Mixed Hydrocarbon Oil under CTI 27011990.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
