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 upheld the invocation of extended limitation under Section 129(2)(c) of the Finance Act, 2019, rejecting the appellant's contention that the SCN was time-barred. The appellant failed to disclose CENVAT credit utilization while declaring liability under SVLDRS, rendering their declaration substantially false. Their omission constituted suppression of facts with intent to evade service tax, justifying extended limitation and demand recovery. The tribunal found that the appellant did not dispute the tax liability but improperly sought to net it against undisclosed CENVAT credit. The penalty under Section 78 was sustained as justified. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.
The CESTAT upheld the invocation of extended limitation under Section 129(2)(c) of the Finance Act, 2019, rejecting the appellant's contention that the SCN was time-barred. The appellant failed to disclose CENVAT credit utilization while declaring liability under SVLDRS, rendering their declaration substantially false. Their omission constituted suppression of facts with intent to evade service tax, justifying extended limitation and demand recovery. The tribunal found that the appellant did not dispute the tax liability but improperly sought to net it against undisclosed CENVAT credit. The penalty under Section 78 was sustained as justified. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
