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 case involving Cenvat Credit and service tax disputes. The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand of Rs. 69,88,709 related to forfeited deposits, finding that such amounts do not constitute consideration for declared services under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act. The tribunal remanded the Cenvat Credit disallowance issue to the original adjudicating authority, directing the appellant to produce requisite invoices and documents for a fresh assessment. The penalty orders were also set aside, with the appeal being allowed partially in favor of the appellant.
CESTAT adjudicated a case involving Cenvat Credit and service tax disputes. The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand of Rs. 69,88,709 related to forfeited deposits, finding that such amounts do not constitute consideration for declared services under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act. The tribunal remanded the Cenvat Credit disallowance issue to the original adjudicating authority, directing the appellant to produce requisite invoices and documents for a fresh assessment. The penalty orders were also set aside, with the appeal being allowed partially in favor of the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.