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 held that the Board's 06.04.2016 circular is prospective and cannot be applied retrospectively; consequent demands of central excise duty based on retrospective application are unsustainable and are set aside. Products manufactured by the appellants were reclassified: certain micronutrient/bio-fertiliser products under CETH 3105/3101 and Plant Growth Regulators under CETH 3808 as per essential-character analysis; specific findings upheld for the impugned products. Demands of interest and penalties arising from the unsustainable duty demands were quashed. Personal penalty under Rule 26(1), CEX Rules, 2002 against the managing director was set aside for lack of mens rea. Deposits paid under protest are refundable subject to adjudication on unjust enrichment. Appeal disposed of.
CESTAT held that the Board's 06.04.2016 circular is prospective and cannot be applied retrospectively; consequent demands of central excise duty based on retrospective application are unsustainable and are set aside. Products manufactured by the appellants were reclassified: certain micronutrient/bio-fertiliser products under CETH 3105/3101 and Plant Growth Regulators under CETH 3808 as per essential-character analysis; specific findings upheld for the impugned products. Demands of interest and penalties arising from the unsustainable duty demands were quashed. Personal penalty under Rule 26(1), CEX Rules, 2002 against the managing director was set aside for lack of mens rea. Deposits paid under protest are refundable subject to adjudication on unjust enrichment. Appeal disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
