Toy balloon tariff classification: functional heading prevails over residual rubber and festive article headings, supporting penalties for deliberate ...
Customs valuation using comparable contemporaneous imports can displace declared value, while missing speaking orders require pursuit before competent...
Foreign customs declarations and importer admissions established undervaluation, supporting sequential value redetermination, differential duty, and m...
Customs seizure safeguards prevent detention-based limitation avoidance and invalidate provisional release conditions for imported vehicles under an i...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 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 Revenue's appeal and upheld the Tribunal's orders: it affirmed that, in light of the SC precedent, the assessee is entitled to deduction under s.80IA(4) for power generated for captive consumption and that the market value may be determined by reference to comparable State Electricity Board rates, yielding a higher deduction where profits are higher. On interest disallowances under s.36(1)(iii) and s.14A, the HC agreed with the Tribunal that the blanket 10% disallowance was impermissible where borrowed funds were not shown to finance dividend-earning investments, and sustained the Tribunal's factual disallowance of Rs.91.80 lakh; it also accepted the consensual Rs.5 lakh disallowance in respect of other administrative expenses.
The HC dismissed Revenue's appeal and upheld the Tribunal's orders: it affirmed that, in light of the SC precedent, the assessee is entitled to deduction under s.80IA(4) for power generated for captive consumption and that the market value may be determined by reference to comparable State Electricity Board rates, yielding a higher deduction where profits are higher. On interest disallowances under s.36(1)(iii) and s.14A, the HC agreed with the Tribunal that the blanket 10% disallowance was impermissible where borrowed funds were not shown to finance dividend-earning investments, and sustained the Tribunal's factual disallowance of Rs.91.80 lakh; it also accepted the consensual Rs.5 lakh disallowance in respect of other administrative expenses.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.