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 dismissed the Revenue's appeal for lack of merit, upholding confiscation of imported gold, manufactured jewellery and packing materials where diversion from the SEZ scheme was found. The Tribunal held that penalty under s.114A CA is not cumulative (duty and interest) but is limited by the statutory disjunctive wording to duty or interest. The impugned order was found defective for failing to adjudicate liability of Respondent-II under ss.112A/114 CA; no findings were recorded nor were penalties imposed or dropped. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to adjudicate the charges against Respondent-II afresh under the SCN dated 27.09.2019 before any maintainable appeal.
CESTAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal for lack of merit, upholding confiscation of imported gold, manufactured jewellery and packing materials where diversion from the SEZ scheme was found. The Tribunal held that penalty under s.114A CA is not cumulative (duty and interest) but is limited by the statutory disjunctive wording to duty or interest. The impugned order was found defective for failing to adjudicate liability of Respondent-II under ss.112A/114 CA; no findings were recorded nor were penalties imposed or dropped. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to adjudicate the charges against Respondent-II afresh under the SCN dated 27.09.2019 before any maintainable appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.