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 upheld absolute confiscation of black pepper imported through unauthorized routes, finding the appellant's narrative of a fictitious intermediary non-credible. The tribunal conclusively established mens rea and deliberate intent to smuggle goods while evading duty payments. No substantive evidence was presented to support the appellant's claims about the alleged supplier. The court imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 and confirmed the seizure of goods, effectively sanctioning complete confiscation due to the appellant's contumacious conduct and failure to demonstrate legitimate procurement. The lower authority's order was substantially upheld with minimal modification regarding penalty quantum.
CESTAT upheld absolute confiscation of black pepper imported through unauthorized routes, finding the appellant's narrative of a fictitious intermediary non-credible. The tribunal conclusively established mens rea and deliberate intent to smuggle goods while evading duty payments. No substantive evidence was presented to support the appellant's claims about the alleged supplier. The court imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 and confirmed the seizure of goods, effectively sanctioning complete confiscation due to the appellant's contumacious conduct and failure to demonstrate legitimate procurement. The lower authority's order was substantially upheld with minimal modification regarding penalty quantum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.