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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 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 the impugned adjudication: imported clear float glass with an absorbent, non-reflecting layer is classifiable under CTH 7005 1090 and qualifies for the Nil BCD benefit under Sl. No. 934 of N/N. 46/2011. The Tribunal found the presence of an absorbent layer to be decisive irrespective of its mode of formation and relied on laboratory test evidence; reclassification to CTH 7005 2990 and application of Sl. No. 935(i) (5% BCD) were held unsustainable. Consequent demands for differential duty, interest and penalties were quashed. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order set aside.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned adjudication: imported clear float glass with an absorbent, non-reflecting layer is classifiable under CTH 7005 1090 and qualifies for the Nil BCD benefit under Sl. No. 934 of N/N. 46/2011. The Tribunal found the presence of an absorbent layer to be decisive irrespective of its mode of formation and relied on laboratory test evidence; reclassification to CTH 7005 2990 and application of Sl. No. 935(i) (5% BCD) were held unsustainable. Consequent demands for differential duty, interest and penalties were quashed. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.