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 declined jurisdiction over appeals filed by appellant-importers challenging an order of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Surat-I, concerning alleged overvaluation of exported goods and fraudulent availment of export incentives. The Tribunal held the cause of action arose from adjudication by an authority situated outside the Bench's territorial jurisdiction and noted that the Ahmedabad Bench was already seised of related appeals on the merits. Applying the principle of comity of courts, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to refrain from entertaining the lis. The Registry was directed to place the matter before the President to constitute a special Bench to hear and decide the appeals; appeals disposed accordingly.
CESTAT declined jurisdiction over appeals filed by appellant-importers challenging an order of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Surat-I, concerning alleged overvaluation of exported goods and fraudulent availment of export incentives. The Tribunal held the cause of action arose from adjudication by an authority situated outside the Bench's territorial jurisdiction and noted that the Ahmedabad Bench was already seised of related appeals on the merits. Applying the principle of comity of courts, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to refrain from entertaining the lis. The Registry was directed to place the matter before the President to constitute a special Bench to hear and decide the appeals; appeals disposed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.