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 Free on Board (FOB) value is the transaction value agreed between buyer and seller, which cannot be modified by any Customs officer or third party. The Tribunal held that Customs authorities lack statutory power to redetermine FOB values for export incentive calculations, as these incentives (drawback, MEIS, and ROSL) must be paid as a percentage of FOB value per government notifications. The Joint Commissioner's order accepting the declared FOB values was restored, as officers have no authority to direct that export incentives be paid on alternative values. The Tribunal criticized DRI's interference in the adjudication process and dismissed Revenue's appeals.
CESTAT ruled that Free on Board (FOB) value is the transaction value agreed between buyer and seller, which cannot be modified by any Customs officer or third party. The Tribunal held that Customs authorities lack statutory power to redetermine FOB values for export incentive calculations, as these incentives (drawback, MEIS, and ROSL) must be paid as a percentage of FOB value per government notifications. The Joint Commissioner's order accepting the declared FOB values was restored, as officers have no authority to direct that export incentives be paid on alternative values. The Tribunal criticized DRI's interference in the adjudication process and dismissed Revenue's appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
