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 appellate proceedings concerning attempted export of prohibited peacock feathers involved allegations against an appellant for misrepresenting goods as 'carpets'. The tribunal found procedural irregularities in evidence collection, specifically improper reliance on statements under Section 108 of Customs Act without proper witness examination and cross-examination. The commissioner's order imposing a penalty of Rs. 3,00,000 was deemed unsustainable due to insufficient direct evidence linking the appellant to the alleged export conspiracy. Mere presence at the premises with the principal accused was deemed inadequate to establish culpability. The tribunal allowed the appeal, effectively setting aside the penalty order and exonerating the appellant from liability under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962.
CESTAT appellate proceedings concerning attempted export of prohibited peacock feathers involved allegations against an appellant for misrepresenting goods as 'carpets'. The tribunal found procedural irregularities in evidence collection, specifically improper reliance on statements under Section 108 of Customs Act without proper witness examination and cross-examination. The commissioner's order imposing a penalty of Rs. 3,00,000 was deemed unsustainable due to insufficient direct evidence linking the appellant to the alleged export conspiracy. Mere presence at the premises with the principal accused was deemed inadequate to establish culpability. The tribunal allowed the appeal, effectively setting aside the penalty order and exonerating the appellant from liability under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.