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" ?
The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that duty recovery and penalties were unauthorised because the second proviso to the Notification had been omitted during the relevant period, thereby removing the statutory condition requiring the intermediary to execute a bond obliging export of equivalent gold within 120 days. Consequently, the revenue could not validly enforce the bond or invoke section 28AA to recover customs duty with interest; any demand premised on non-fulfilment of the deleted proviso lacked legal authority. Statements obtained under section 108 were held irrelevant for liability, the 2009 circular inapplicable, and penalties under sections 112 and 114AA (and recovery against partners/managers) unsustainable.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that duty recovery and penalties were unauthorised because the second proviso to the Notification had been omitted during the relevant period, thereby removing the statutory condition requiring the intermediary to execute a bond obliging export of equivalent gold within 120 days. Consequently, the revenue could not validly enforce the bond or invoke section 28AA to recover customs duty with interest; any demand premised on non-fulfilment of the deleted proviso lacked legal authority. Statements obtained under section 108 were held irrelevant for liability, the 2009 circular inapplicable, and penalties under sections 112 and 114AA (and recovery against partners/managers) unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
