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 penalty proceedings under s.158 Customs Act arising from alleged contravention of r.6(3), Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty) Rules, 2017, where quarterly returns were submitted late and lacked certain particulars. Applying established principles that penal consequences require deliberate, dishonest or conscious disregard of statutory duty, the Tribunal found the lapse to be bona fide and merely procedural rather than constituting culpable breach warranting penalty. Consequently, the show-cause notice's demand for penalty was quashed and penal proceedings dropped; no further penal action shall be sustained against the Appellant on the facts established in this case.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside penalty proceedings under s.158 Customs Act arising from alleged contravention of r.6(3), Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty) Rules, 2017, where quarterly returns were submitted late and lacked certain particulars. Applying established principles that penal consequences require deliberate, dishonest or conscious disregard of statutory duty, the Tribunal found the lapse to be bona fide and merely procedural rather than constituting culpable breach warranting penalty. Consequently, the show-cause notice's demand for penalty was quashed and penal proceedings dropped; no further penal action shall be sustained against the Appellant on the facts established in this case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.