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 valuation dispute concerning transportation charges for Aviation Turbine Fuel (ATF). The Tribunal distinguished between ATF carried in aircraft fuel tanks for airline consumption and ATF imported as cargo. Applying precedent from a previous Larger Bench decision in Jet Airways, the Tribunal held that transportation costs for ATF within aircraft fuel tanks are not includable in the assessable value for customs duty calculation. The key differentiation hinged on whether ATF is a consumable for airline operations or a separately transported cargo. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, excluding transportation charges from the customs valuation for remnant ATF carried in aircraft tanks.
CESTAT adjudicated a customs valuation dispute concerning transportation charges for Aviation Turbine Fuel (ATF). The Tribunal distinguished between ATF carried in aircraft fuel tanks for airline consumption and ATF imported as cargo. Applying precedent from a previous Larger Bench decision in Jet Airways, the Tribunal held that transportation costs for ATF within aircraft fuel tanks are not includable in the assessable value for customs duty calculation. The key differentiation hinged on whether ATF is a consumable for airline operations or a separately transported cargo. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, excluding transportation charges from the customs valuation for remnant ATF carried in aircraft tanks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
