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 and set aside the impugned order that had revised assessable value by rejecting the declared transaction value under rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules. The Tribunal held that benchmarking against contemporaneous imports required demonstrable similarity and congruity, which the adjudicating authority failed to establish; reliance on an unrelated notation in the First Schedule to compute value was not legally permissible. The assessment based on such proxy methodology was quashed, the challenged revision of assessable value was vacated, and the importers' declared transaction value was consequently upheld.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order that had revised assessable value by rejecting the declared transaction value under rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules. The Tribunal held that benchmarking against contemporaneous imports required demonstrable similarity and congruity, which the adjudicating authority failed to establish; reliance on an unrelated notation in the First Schedule to compute value was not legally permissible. The assessment based on such proxy methodology was quashed, the challenged revision of assessable value was vacated, and the importers' declared transaction value was consequently upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.