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 set aside the penalty imposed under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962, on the appellant CHA for alleged failure to verify exporter credentials and obtain written authorization before processing export documents. The Tribunal found that the appellant had obtained the exporter's signature on Shipping Bills, which sufficed as authorization in the absence of any prescribed proforma at the time. Investigations failed to establish any lapse by the CHA, and the goods were duly examined and cleared by customs officers. Reliance was placed on precedent establishing that penalties under Section 114 are inappropriate for procedural shortcomings related to authorization, which fall under Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the penalty was quashed.
The CESTAT set aside the penalty imposed under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962, on the appellant CHA for alleged failure to verify exporter credentials and obtain written authorization before processing export documents. The Tribunal found that the appellant had obtained the exporter's signature on Shipping Bills, which sufficed as authorization in the absence of any prescribed proforma at the time. Investigations failed to establish any lapse by the CHA, and the goods were duly examined and cleared by customs officers. Reliance was placed on precedent establishing that penalties under Section 114 are inappropriate for procedural shortcomings related to authorization, which fall under Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the penalty was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.