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 seizure, confiscation under s.111(d) of the Customs Act and the imposition of redemption fine and related penalty, holding that the importer acted with bona fide belief in declaring transaction value, responded to EDI queries and paid duties demanded under the DGFT notification while challenges to that notification were pending. The Tribunal found the matter to be one of reassessment of the bill of entry where no malafide or evasion was established and the adjudicating authority failed to record sufficient reasons for confiscation and redemption fine. Consequential orders imposing forfeiture and fines are quashed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside seizure, confiscation under s.111(d) of the Customs Act and the imposition of redemption fine and related penalty, holding that the importer acted with bona fide belief in declaring transaction value, responded to EDI queries and paid duties demanded under the DGFT notification while challenges to that notification were pending. The Tribunal found the matter to be one of reassessment of the bill of entry where no malafide or evasion was established and the adjudicating authority failed to record sufficient reasons for confiscation and redemption fine. Consequential orders imposing forfeiture and fines are quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.