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, holding that under the statutory SVLDR scheme and attendant CBIC instructions (including the provision that co-noticees apply after the principal has settled), a principal's valid settlement and issuance of SVLDR certification can result in discharge or exoneration of co-noticees from penalty liability on equitable and natural justice grounds. The Tribunal recognised that administrative delays in issuing certificates and the scheme's limited window justified extending the settlement benefit to co-accused who could not timely apply, and affirmed that the co-noticees were rightly accorded relief following principal settlement. A prior High Court decision under settlement commission provisions was distinguished.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that under the statutory SVLDR scheme and attendant CBIC instructions (including the provision that co-noticees apply after the principal has settled), a principal's valid settlement and issuance of SVLDR certification can result in discharge or exoneration of co-noticees from penalty liability on equitable and natural justice grounds. The Tribunal recognised that administrative delays in issuing certificates and the scheme's limited window justified extending the settlement benefit to co-accused who could not timely apply, and affirmed that the co-noticees were rightly accorded relief following principal settlement. A prior High Court decision under settlement commission provisions was distinguished.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.