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 remanded a case concerning refusal to amend shipping bills under s.149 of Customs Act, 1962. The appellant sought amendments to include revised values, claiming they had documentary evidence existing at the time of export to justify the changes. The Tribunal clarified that while amendments aren't permitted as a matter of course, authorities have discretion when supported by contemporaneous documentary evidence. The appellant's request aimed to facilitate receipt of differential payments through proper channels. CESTAT directed the original authority to re-examine the documents with reasons for acceptance or rejection, while providing the appellant an opportunity of hearing before concluding the remand proceedings.
CESTAT remanded a case concerning refusal to amend shipping bills under s.149 of Customs Act, 1962. The appellant sought amendments to include revised values, claiming they had documentary evidence existing at the time of export to justify the changes. The Tribunal clarified that while amendments aren't permitted as a matter of course, authorities have discretion when supported by contemporaneous documentary evidence. The appellant's request aimed to facilitate receipt of differential payments through proper channels. CESTAT directed the original authority to re-examine the documents with reasons for acceptance or rejection, while providing the appellant an opportunity of hearing before concluding the remand proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
