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 the appeal for non-prosecution pursuant to Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The appellant had sought adjournments beyond the statutory maximum of three times permitted under Section 35C(1A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Relying on Ishwar lal Mali Rathod, where the SC condemned the practice of mechanical adjournments, the Tribunal found no justification for granting additional adjournments. The SC had previously emphasized that parties who repeatedly seek adjournments despite specific warnings and opportunities effectively misuse judicial grace, warranting dismissal of their proceedings.
CESTAT dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution pursuant to Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The appellant had sought adjournments beyond the statutory maximum of three times permitted under Section 35C(1A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Relying on Ishwar lal Mali Rathod, where the SC condemned the practice of mechanical adjournments, the Tribunal found no justification for granting additional adjournments. The SC had previously emphasized that parties who repeatedly seek adjournments despite specific warnings and opportunities effectively misuse judicial grace, warranting dismissal of their proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
