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 appellant's appeal as time-barred, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order rejecting the appeal under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Order-in-Original was received by the appellant on 16.12.2021; the statutory window for appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) expired after 60 days with an additional discretionary 30 days. The appeal was filed on 05.09.2022, well beyond the prescribed period. Applying authoritative precedent that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded in this context, the tribunal held there is no jurisdiction to condone delay beyond the prescribed extension. Consequently, no infirmity was found in the impugned order and the appeal was dismissed.
The CESTAT dismissed the appellant's appeal as time-barred, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order rejecting the appeal under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Order-in-Original was received by the appellant on 16.12.2021; the statutory window for appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) expired after 60 days with an additional discretionary 30 days. The appeal was filed on 05.09.2022, well beyond the prescribed period. Applying authoritative precedent that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded in this context, the tribunal held there is no jurisdiction to condone delay beyond the prescribed extension. Consequently, no infirmity was found in the impugned order and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.