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 adjudicated a customs broker license revocation case involving regulatory non-compliance. The tribunal found violations of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, specifically Regulation 10(d), for failing to exercise due diligence and adequately advise the importer. The original penalty of complete security deposit forfeiture and Rs. 50,000 penalty was substantially mitigated, reducing security deposit forfeiture to 15% and penalty to Rs. 10,000. The appellate tribunal partially allowed the appeal, recognizing procedural lapses while moderating the punitive measures, thereby balancing regulatory enforcement with proportionate disciplinary action against the customs broker.
CESTAT adjudicated a customs broker license revocation case involving regulatory non-compliance. The tribunal found violations of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, specifically Regulation 10(d), for failing to exercise due diligence and adequately advise the importer. The original penalty of complete security deposit forfeiture and Rs. 50,000 penalty was substantially mitigated, reducing security deposit forfeiture to 15% and penalty to Rs. 10,000. The appellate tribunal partially allowed the appeal, recognizing procedural lapses while moderating the punitive measures, thereby balancing regulatory enforcement with proportionate disciplinary action against the customs broker.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
