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 ruled that the enhancement of imported goods' value under Rule 5 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 was procedurally incorrect. The lower authorities failed to properly reject the declared value per Rule 12 and prematurely applied Rule 5. Reliance on Central Board of Excise and Customs database did not satisfy legal requirements for value rejection. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the order challenging duty and penalty assessments, effectively allowing the appellant's appeal and invalidating the previous administrative determination.
CESTAT ruled that the enhancement of imported goods' value under Rule 5 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 was procedurally incorrect. The lower authorities failed to properly reject the declared value per Rule 12 and prematurely applied Rule 5. Reliance on Central Board of Excise and Customs database did not satisfy legal requirements for value rejection. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the order challenging duty and penalty assessments, effectively allowing the appellant's appeal and invalidating the previous administrative determination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.