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 imported Architectural Gypsum Moulding products were correctly classifiable under CTH 6809 9000 as articles of plaster, not under CTH 2520 2090 covering crude gypsum. The appellant deliberately mis-declared classification to obtain exemption under Notification 12/2012, unavailable for Chapter 68 products. Evidence showed appellant previously classified similar products under CTH 6809, establishing suppression and mis-declaration. CESTAT confirmed duty demand with interest and penalty under Section 114A against the importer, but set aside penalty under Section 114AA on customs broker, finding no evidence of broker's involvement in mis-declaration. Appeal partially allowed.
CESTAT held that imported Architectural Gypsum Moulding products were correctly classifiable under CTH 6809 9000 as articles of plaster, not under CTH 2520 2090 covering crude gypsum. The appellant deliberately mis-declared classification to obtain exemption under Notification 12/2012, unavailable for Chapter 68 products. Evidence showed appellant previously classified similar products under CTH 6809, establishing suppression and mis-declaration. CESTAT confirmed duty demand with interest and penalty under Section 114A against the importer, but set aside penalty under Section 114AA on customs broker, finding no evidence of broker's involvement in mis-declaration. Appeal partially allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
