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 export value of iron ore must be determined strictly under S.14 of the Customs Act read with the Export Valuation Rules, and that the declared transaction value cannot be discarded absent valid grounds. It found no evidence of any consideration beyond the amounts reflected in the final invoices, which were based on CIQ test reports and contractual terms providing for DMT-based pricing, and duly supported by BRCs. The recomputation of value by adopting CRCL moisture content at load port was held unsustainable, following earlier coordinate Bench decisions. The impugned order of the Commr(A) was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to finalize provisional assessment on transaction value and recompute the admissible refund.
CESTAT held that export value of iron ore must be determined strictly under S.14 of the Customs Act read with the Export Valuation Rules, and that the declared transaction value cannot be discarded absent valid grounds. It found no evidence of any consideration beyond the amounts reflected in the final invoices, which were based on CIQ test reports and contractual terms providing for DMT-based pricing, and duly supported by BRCs. The recomputation of value by adopting CRCL moisture content at load port was held unsustainable, following earlier coordinate Bench decisions. The impugned order of the Commr(A) was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to finalize provisional assessment on transaction value and recompute the admissible refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.