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 set aside the impugned order, finding non-application of mind and failure to consider technical submissions that showed the imported goods were copolymer and thus outside the notified scope for anti-dumping duty; the show-cause notice is restored and remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal held that self-assessment and RMS do not obviate the statutory obligation to reassess under sections 17(2)-(4) and to record a speaking order as required by section 17(5); any extended-period invocation and penalties under section 114A must be predicated on a valid reassessment of rate/value under section 28. The appeal is disposed by remand.
CESTAT set aside the impugned order, finding non-application of mind and failure to consider technical submissions that showed the imported goods were copolymer and thus outside the notified scope for anti-dumping duty; the show-cause notice is restored and remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal held that self-assessment and RMS do not obviate the statutory obligation to reassess under sections 17(2)-(4) and to record a speaking order as required by section 17(5); any extended-period invocation and penalties under section 114A must be predicated on a valid reassessment of rate/value under section 28. The appeal is disposed by remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.