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 allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter to the original adjudicating authority for de novo determination of the assessable value under the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988/2007 as applicable. The Tribunal found the reassessment and recovery were founded solely on investigation statements and an engineer's certificate without lawful opportunity for testing or cross-examination, constituting breach of principles of natural justice and improper reliance outside the strict procedural framework prescribed under section 14 and the Valuation Rules. The Tribunal further held that appropriation of amounts paid towards alleged duties on imports prior to the limitation period under section 28 lacked statutory empowerment and was not sustainable.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter to the original adjudicating authority for de novo determination of the assessable value under the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988/2007 as applicable. The Tribunal found the reassessment and recovery were founded solely on investigation statements and an engineer's certificate without lawful opportunity for testing or cross-examination, constituting breach of principles of natural justice and improper reliance outside the strict procedural framework prescribed under section 14 and the Valuation Rules. The Tribunal further held that appropriation of amounts paid towards alleged duties on imports prior to the limitation period under section 28 lacked statutory empowerment and was not sustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.