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 HC dismissed the appeal and upheld the majority award of the Arbitral Tribunal and the Single Judge, holding that the contractor cannot be saddled with liability to reimburse customs duty. The employer's claim for repayment of Rs.1,00,30,984 was rejected by the Tribunal because the employer failed to produce the mandatory exemption certificates at importation as required by Notification No.84/97 and the statutory scheme (including the timing mandate under s.149 Customs Act), producing belated certificates only thereafter and failing to obtain retrospective relief from customs. The Tribunal's factual and contractual conclusion was held to be a reasonable conclusion of law and fact, affording no ground for interference.
The HC dismissed the appeal and upheld the majority award of the Arbitral Tribunal and the Single Judge, holding that the contractor cannot be saddled with liability to reimburse customs duty. The employer's claim for repayment of Rs.1,00,30,984 was rejected by the Tribunal because the employer failed to produce the mandatory exemption certificates at importation as required by Notification No.84/97 and the statutory scheme (including the timing mandate under s.149 Customs Act), producing belated certificates only thereafter and failing to obtain retrospective relief from customs. The Tribunal's factual and contractual conclusion was held to be a reasonable conclusion of law and fact, affording no ground for interference.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
