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 upheld the validity of the SCN issued under s.28(4) r/w s.124 of the Customs Act, holding that gross misdeclaration of description, quantity and value of contraband goods, supported by overseas customs reports, call data records and handwriting expert opinion, established collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression. The plea of lack of corroborative evidence and violation of natural justice due to denial of cross-examination was rejected, as statements under s.108 were voluntary and independent evidence was ample; no prejudice was shown. Departmental officers were found complicit in facilitating fraudulent clearances and were held amenable to penalty as "any person", with protection under s.155 denied. Penalties under ss.112 and 114AA on importers and officers were sustained, and the appeals were disposed of accordingly.
CESTAT upheld the validity of the SCN issued under s.28(4) r/w s.124 of the Customs Act, holding that gross misdeclaration of description, quantity and value of contraband goods, supported by overseas customs reports, call data records and handwriting expert opinion, established collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression. The plea of lack of corroborative evidence and violation of natural justice due to denial of cross-examination was rejected, as statements under s.108 were voluntary and independent evidence was ample; no prejudice was shown. Departmental officers were found complicit in facilitating fraudulent clearances and were held amenable to penalty as "any person", with protection under s.155 denied. Penalties under ss.112 and 114AA on importers and officers were sustained, and the appeals were disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.