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 the adjudication to the extent it proceeded without legal authority. The Tribunal held that breach of a pre-import condition attached only the statutory consequence expressly provided in s.3(12) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - recovery of integrated tax - and does not permit imposition of confiscation under s.111(o) or penalty under s.114A of the Customs Act, 1962 as ancillary consequences. Further, in the absence of specific charging provisions authorising interest, redemption fine or other penalties, such monetary consequences cannot be imposed by invoking recovery machinery. The show-cause notice insofar as it sought those measures was quashed; appeal allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the adjudication to the extent it proceeded without legal authority. The Tribunal held that breach of a pre-import condition attached only the statutory consequence expressly provided in s.3(12) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - recovery of integrated tax - and does not permit imposition of confiscation under s.111(o) or penalty under s.114A of the Customs Act, 1962 as ancillary consequences. Further, in the absence of specific charging provisions authorising interest, redemption fine or other penalties, such monetary consequences cannot be imposed by invoking recovery machinery. The show-cause notice insofar as it sought those measures was quashed; appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
