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 the DRI officer is a proper authority to issue the SCN under the Customs Act, rejecting the CHA's objection. However, M/s Seaways Shipping Limited, the CHA, was incorrectly penalized under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act instead of the relevant CHA Regulations; thus, the penalty against the CHA was set aside. Regarding the employee, Shri KVM Arjun, evidence including his unchallenged statements established his involvement in fraudulent exports, rendering him liable under Section 114(iii). Nevertheless, the penalty of Rs. 75 lakhs was deemed excessive and was reduced to Rs. 15 lakhs. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, modifying the impugned order by quashing the penalty on the CHA and reducing the penalty on the employee.
The CESTAT held that the DRI officer is a proper authority to issue the SCN under the Customs Act, rejecting the CHA's objection. However, M/s Seaways Shipping Limited, the CHA, was incorrectly penalized under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act instead of the relevant CHA Regulations; thus, the penalty against the CHA was set aside. Regarding the employee, Shri KVM Arjun, evidence including his unchallenged statements established his involvement in fraudulent exports, rendering him liable under Section 114(iii). Nevertheless, the penalty of Rs. 75 lakhs was deemed excessive and was reduced to Rs. 15 lakhs. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, modifying the impugned order by quashing the penalty on the CHA and reducing the penalty on the employee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
