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 Revenue failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the intercepted Indian currency was intended for illegal export, noting the interception occurred about 3 km from the Bangladesh border and that the benefit of doubt accrues to the appellant. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of absolute confiscation and the imposition of penalty under s.114 of the Customs Act, 1962, and directed the release of Rs.1,500,000 deposited with a bank, which had been seized from an intercepted person but purportedly belonging to the appellant. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order quashed.
CESTAT held that the Revenue failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the intercepted Indian currency was intended for illegal export, noting the interception occurred about 3 km from the Bangladesh border and that the benefit of doubt accrues to the appellant. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of absolute confiscation and the imposition of penalty under s.114 of the Customs Act, 1962, and directed the release of Rs.1,500,000 deposited with a bank, which had been seized from an intercepted person but purportedly belonging to the appellant. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
