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 dismissed the appeal seeking refund of customs duties paid under the EPCG scheme due to non-fulfillment of export obligations. The appellant failed to produce the mandatory installation certificate and was found to have diverted capital goods imported duty-free elsewhere, violating bond conditions. The tribunal held that the appellant, being aware of their inability to meet export obligations, was obligated to deposit the customs duty. The appellant's misconduct barred any entitlement to refund, and the introduction of GST was held irrelevant. The principle that a party cannot benefit from its own wrongdoing was emphasized, reinforcing that the appellant's claim lacked both merit and equity. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, affirming the authorities' demand for duty deposit.
The CESTAT dismissed the appeal seeking refund of customs duties paid under the EPCG scheme due to non-fulfillment of export obligations. The appellant failed to produce the mandatory installation certificate and was found to have diverted capital goods imported duty-free elsewhere, violating bond conditions. The tribunal held that the appellant, being aware of their inability to meet export obligations, was obligated to deposit the customs duty. The appellant's misconduct barred any entitlement to refund, and the introduction of GST was held irrelevant. The principle that a party cannot benefit from its own wrongdoing was emphasized, reinforcing that the appellant's claim lacked both merit and equity. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, affirming the authorities' demand for duty deposit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.