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 held that Appellant's processing of imported steel wire ropes through cutting, fusing, crimping with accessories, and packaging as "Gripple Hanger System" constituted manufacture under Central Excise Act. The processed product emerged as distinct commodity with separate name, character, use, and higher marketability than individual components. However, CESTAT partially allowed appeal on limitation grounds. Revenue failed to establish intent to evade duty or suppression of facts warranting extended limitation period under Section 11A(4). Show cause notice based merely on audit objection without cogent evidence of willful suppression cannot invoke extended period. Excise duty demand within normal limitation period upheld; demand and penalty for extended period set aside as time-barred.
CESTAT held that Appellant's processing of imported steel wire ropes through cutting, fusing, crimping with accessories, and packaging as "Gripple Hanger System" constituted manufacture under Central Excise Act. The processed product emerged as distinct commodity with separate name, character, use, and higher marketability than individual components. However, CESTAT partially allowed appeal on limitation grounds. Revenue failed to establish intent to evade duty or suppression of facts warranting extended limitation period under Section 11A(4). Show cause notice based merely on audit objection without cogent evidence of willful suppression cannot invoke extended period. Excise duty demand within normal limitation period upheld; demand and penalty for extended period set aside as time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.