Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
CESTAT held that royalty payments to a foreign entity for technology and trademark use should not be included in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c). The tribunal found that the royalty was calculated based on CKD kit imports and was independent of the sale conditions. The First Appellate Authority's order was set aside due to lack of reasoned analysis, violating principles of natural justice. The royalty payment was deemed unrelated to the import transaction, thus not qualifying for inclusion in the dutiable value. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, rejecting the attempt to enhance the customs duty assessment.
CESTAT held that royalty payments to a foreign entity for technology and trademark use should not be included in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c). The tribunal found that the royalty was calculated based on CKD kit imports and was independent of the sale conditions. The First Appellate Authority's order was set aside due to lack of reasoned analysis, violating principles of natural justice. The royalty payment was deemed unrelated to the import transaction, thus not qualifying for inclusion in the dutiable value. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, rejecting the attempt to enhance the customs duty assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
