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 filed by the importer of the aircraft and spare parts, holding that the benefit of the exemption notification was rightly available. It found no violation of Condition 104, as operation of non-scheduled air transport services through charter operations, including for group companies against remuneration, satisfied the requirement of use for non-scheduled operations. Non-issuance of tickets and absence of published tariff did not defeat the exemption. CESTAT further held that invocation of the extended period of limitation under s. 28(4) Customs Act was unsustainable, as there was no specific finding of deliberate suppression or intent to evade duty. Consequently, the demand, interest and penalty were set aside and the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority was quashed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal filed by the importer of the aircraft and spare parts, holding that the benefit of the exemption notification was rightly available. It found no violation of Condition 104, as operation of non-scheduled air transport services through charter operations, including for group companies against remuneration, satisfied the requirement of use for non-scheduled operations. Non-issuance of tickets and absence of published tariff did not defeat the exemption. CESTAT further held that invocation of the extended period of limitation under s. 28(4) Customs Act was unsustainable, as there was no specific finding of deliberate suppression or intent to evade duty. Consequently, the demand, interest and penalty were set aside and the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.