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" ?
The HC quashed and set aside the order rejecting the petitioner's refund claim of Rs. 45,84,371/- for CVD and SAD paid after failing to fulfill export obligations under Advance Authorization and EPCG schemes. The Court determined that Section 142(8)(a) of CGST Act was inapplicable as the petitioner had voluntarily deposited duties rather than through recovery proceedings. The refund claim must be processed under Section 142(3) read with Section 142(6)(a) of CGST Act, which requires application of Central Excise Act, 1944 and Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The matter was remanded to the authorities for determination on merits under the appropriate legal provisions. The petition was partially allowed.
The HC quashed and set aside the order rejecting the petitioner's refund claim of Rs. 45,84,371/- for CVD and SAD paid after failing to fulfill export obligations under Advance Authorization and EPCG schemes. The Court determined that Section 142(8)(a) of CGST Act was inapplicable as the petitioner had voluntarily deposited duties rather than through recovery proceedings. The refund claim must be processed under Section 142(3) read with Section 142(6)(a) of CGST Act, which requires application of Central Excise Act, 1944 and Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The matter was remanded to the authorities for determination on merits under the appropriate legal provisions. The petition was partially allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
