Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT set aside the impugned order passed under section 250 by the NFAC, observing that the NFAC failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 250(6) of the Act by not stating the points of determination, its decisions thereon, and clear reasons for confirming the additions. Although the NFAC acted within the restrictions of section 251(1)(a) by adjudicating ex parte due to the assessee's non-compliance and absence of cogent evidence, it erred in merely confirming the assessment order without independent inquiry or reasoned findings. Consequently, the matter was remanded to the NFAC for de novo adjudication, directing it to provide the assessee no more than three opportunities to present its case and to pass a reasoned, speaking order in accordance with section 250(6). The ITAT refrained from expressing any view on the merits.
The ITAT set aside the impugned order passed under section 250 by the NFAC, observing that the NFAC failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 250(6) of the Act by not stating the points of determination, its decisions thereon, and clear reasons for confirming the additions. Although the NFAC acted within the restrictions of section 251(1)(a) by adjudicating ex parte due to the assessee's non-compliance and absence of cogent evidence, it erred in merely confirming the assessment order without independent inquiry or reasoned findings. Consequently, the matter was remanded to the NFAC for de novo adjudication, directing it to provide the assessee no more than three opportunities to present its case and to pass a reasoned, speaking order in accordance with section 250(6). The ITAT refrained from expressing any view on the merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.