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" ?
The HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's factual finding that the respondent-assessee, an EOU, had lawfully procured duty-free inputs under CT-3, consumed them in manufacturing, and, upon inability to export finished LPG due to regulatory clearance constraints, sold into the DTA after voluntarily discharging the duty and interest and notifying the Department. The Court held that no show-cause notice was required where there was no suppression of material facts and duty with interest had been paid prior to any notice; consequently the extended limitation provisions under s.28(2B) Customs Act and s.11A(2B) CEA could not be invoked and penalties under s.114 Customs / s.11AC CEA were unsustainable.
The HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's factual finding that the respondent-assessee, an EOU, had lawfully procured duty-free inputs under CT-3, consumed them in manufacturing, and, upon inability to export finished LPG due to regulatory clearance constraints, sold into the DTA after voluntarily discharging the duty and interest and notifying the Department. The Court held that no show-cause notice was required where there was no suppression of material facts and duty with interest had been paid prior to any notice; consequently the extended limitation provisions under s.28(2B) Customs Act and s.11A(2B) CEA could not be invoked and penalties under s.114 Customs / s.11AC CEA were unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.