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 set aside penalty imposed under Section 114 of Customs Act, 1962 for alleged overvaluation of exported CD ROMs intended to fraudulently claim DEPB scripts. The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 114 requires goods to be liable for confiscation under Section 113, but since goods were already exported, confiscation under Section 113(d) was impossible. Additionally, no material evidence established appellant's knowledge of inflated valuation. The Tribunal ruled that without sustainable confiscation proceedings, penalty under Section 114 cannot be sustained, thereby allowing the appeal and setting aside the Commissioner's penalty order dated 31.01.2006.
CESTAT set aside penalty imposed under Section 114 of Customs Act, 1962 for alleged overvaluation of exported CD ROMs intended to fraudulently claim DEPB scripts. The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 114 requires goods to be liable for confiscation under Section 113, but since goods were already exported, confiscation under Section 113(d) was impossible. Additionally, no material evidence established appellant's knowledge of inflated valuation. The Tribunal ruled that without sustainable confiscation proceedings, penalty under Section 114 cannot be sustained, thereby allowing the appeal and setting aside the Commissioner's penalty order dated 31.01.2006.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.