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 seized areca (betel) nuts were neither prohibited nor notified under the Customs Act, therefore the Revenue bore the evidentiary burden to prove smuggling. The Tribunal found the Revenue failed to discharge that onus; statements relied upon were insufficient to establish illegal importation from Myanmar and Indonesia or contraband status. Consequentially, the monetary penalties levied against the appellants for alleged illegal procurement and importation were found unsustainable and were set aside. The impugned penalty orders are quashed and the appeal is allowed to the extent of striking down the penalties; no further sanction may be imposed on the appellants based on the present record.
CESTAT held that seized areca (betel) nuts were neither prohibited nor notified under the Customs Act, therefore the Revenue bore the evidentiary burden to prove smuggling. The Tribunal found the Revenue failed to discharge that onus; statements relied upon were insufficient to establish illegal importation from Myanmar and Indonesia or contraband status. Consequentially, the monetary penalties levied against the appellants for alleged illegal procurement and importation were found unsustainable and were set aside. The impugned penalty orders are quashed and the appeal is allowed to the extent of striking down the penalties; no further sanction may be imposed on the appellants based on the present record.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.