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 SC affirmed the impugned CESTAT and High Court orders, dismissing the appeals. The Court held that the CESTAT correctly construed Rule 3 regarding the expressions "delivered outside India and used outside India" and "provided from India and used outside India," and appropriately evaluated the contractual relationship between service provider and recipient to determine export of services. The determinations were held to be findings of fact devoid of perversity and not amenable to re-determination on appeal. Reliance on prior authoritative decisions was permitted. Given the factual nature of the conclusions and the absence of any legal error, there was no basis to interfere, and the appeals were dismissed.
The SC affirmed the impugned CESTAT and High Court orders, dismissing the appeals. The Court held that the CESTAT correctly construed Rule 3 regarding the expressions "delivered outside India and used outside India" and "provided from India and used outside India," and appropriately evaluated the contractual relationship between service provider and recipient to determine export of services. The determinations were held to be findings of fact devoid of perversity and not amenable to re-determination on appeal. Reliance on prior authoritative decisions was permitted. Given the factual nature of the conclusions and the absence of any legal error, there was no basis to interfere, and the appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.