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 held that the imported in-vitro diagnostic reagents are correctly classifiable under CTI 3822 0019 as "other diagnostic reagents for medical diagnosis" and not under the residual entry CTI 3822 0090. The Tribunal found that N/N. 16/2019 and 17/2019 merely revised the rate of duty and did not alter the tariff description under heading 3822, rendering the contrary conclusion of the Commr (Appeals) factually and legally erroneous. Noting that the department had earlier accepted, on merits, an Order-in-Appeal classifying identical goods of the same appellant under CTI 3822 0019, CESTAT held that the department could not now adopt a contrary stand. The impugned order dated 20.07.2021 was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
CESTAT held that the imported in-vitro diagnostic reagents are correctly classifiable under CTI 3822 0019 as "other diagnostic reagents for medical diagnosis" and not under the residual entry CTI 3822 0090. The Tribunal found that N/N. 16/2019 and 17/2019 merely revised the rate of duty and did not alter the tariff description under heading 3822, rendering the contrary conclusion of the Commr (Appeals) factually and legally erroneous. Noting that the department had earlier accepted, on merits, an Order-in-Appeal classifying identical goods of the same appellant under CTI 3822 0019, CESTAT held that the department could not now adopt a contrary stand. The impugned order dated 20.07.2021 was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.