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 dismissed the appeal and upheld the impugned order confirming re-determination of customs values and imposition of penalties. The Tribunal found no breach of natural justice, noting multiple personal-hearing opportunities and protracted non-cooperation by the appellant; the adjudicator lawfully concluded the matter within statutory timeframes. Electronic documents derived from the appellant's email and printed during inspection were held authentic and admissible; the testimonial statement was accepted as voluntary. Section 114AA was construed to extend to the facts of the case, and the penalty cap (not exceeding five times the mis-declared goods' value) rendered the imposed Rs. 30,00,000 proportionate to the declared value of Rs. 36,01,70,703.
CESTAT dismissed the appeal and upheld the impugned order confirming re-determination of customs values and imposition of penalties. The Tribunal found no breach of natural justice, noting multiple personal-hearing opportunities and protracted non-cooperation by the appellant; the adjudicator lawfully concluded the matter within statutory timeframes. Electronic documents derived from the appellant's email and printed during inspection were held authentic and admissible; the testimonial statement was accepted as voluntary. Section 114AA was construed to extend to the facts of the case, and the penalty cap (not exceeding five times the mis-declared goods' value) rendered the imposed Rs. 30,00,000 proportionate to the declared value of Rs. 36,01,70,703.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.