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" ?
The CESTAT held that statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act, without compliance with the mandatory procedural safeguards under section 138B, are inadmissible as evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) had relied solely on such statements by the appellant company's Director to determine undervaluation and misdeclaration of imported motorcycles. Given the failure to adhere to the prescribed procedure, the Tribunal found this reliance unjustified and quashed the impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) order dated October 23, 2012, was set aside, restoring the appellant's declared valuation and rejecting the reassessment based on the inadmissible statements.
The CESTAT held that statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act, without compliance with the mandatory procedural safeguards under section 138B, are inadmissible as evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) had relied solely on such statements by the appellant company's Director to determine undervaluation and misdeclaration of imported motorcycles. Given the failure to adhere to the prescribed procedure, the Tribunal found this reliance unjustified and quashed the impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) order dated October 23, 2012, was set aside, restoring the appellant's declared valuation and rejecting the reassessment based on the inadmissible statements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.