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 set aside the impugned adjudication and allowed the appeal by way of remand, holding that the adjudicating authority erred in classifying the imported goods without respecting the tariff hierarchy and General Rules for Interpretation. The Tribunal found the CBEC circular relied upon to distinguish "ortho" from other phthalates to be non-authoritative and unsupported by rationale, and that the authority failed to discharge the onus of proving the goods were unambiguously classifiable under the sub-heading alleged. The matter is remitted for fresh adjudication, with directions to reassess classification issues, address the challenge to the CRCL test report and furnish it for further scrutiny before concluding liability.
CESTAT set aside the impugned adjudication and allowed the appeal by way of remand, holding that the adjudicating authority erred in classifying the imported goods without respecting the tariff hierarchy and General Rules for Interpretation. The Tribunal found the CBEC circular relied upon to distinguish "ortho" from other phthalates to be non-authoritative and unsupported by rationale, and that the authority failed to discharge the onus of proving the goods were unambiguously classifiable under the sub-heading alleged. The matter is remitted for fresh adjudication, with directions to reassess classification issues, address the challenge to the CRCL test report and furnish it for further scrutiny before concluding liability.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.