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" ?
CESTAT upheld the Original Authority's determination that the appellant qualifies as a "new industrial unit" under Para 5(a) of Notification No.20/2007-C.E., concluding the unit commenced commercial production w.e.f. 31.03.2017. The Tribunal rejected the revenue's continuity theory equating the appellant with the pre-existing unit, finding distinct operational setups and no evidentiary basis to treat them as identical; the appellant's establishment at a location approved by the competent State Committee further corroborated its status. Because the appellant falls within the first category of the Notification, the 25% expansion precondition is inapplicable. Consequently, the appellant is entitled to the ten-year exemption under Notification No.20/2007-C.E.; appeal disposed.
CESTAT upheld the Original Authority's determination that the appellant qualifies as a "new industrial unit" under Para 5(a) of Notification No.20/2007-C.E., concluding the unit commenced commercial production w.e.f. 31.03.2017. The Tribunal rejected the revenue's continuity theory equating the appellant with the pre-existing unit, finding distinct operational setups and no evidentiary basis to treat them as identical; the appellant's establishment at a location approved by the competent State Committee further corroborated its status. Because the appellant falls within the first category of the Notification, the 25% expansion precondition is inapplicable. Consequently, the appellant is entitled to the ten-year exemption under Notification No.20/2007-C.E.; appeal disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.