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 of the anonymized importer in full and set aside the impugned order-in-original. It held that N/N. 29/2010-Cus is an unconditional exemption from special additional duty, applicable solely on the basis of goods description, and the Dept. cannot read into it conditions not expressly stipulated, including alleged violations of the Legal Metrology Act. CESTAT held that the proper officer, while reassessing differential duty, is bound to extend available exemptions. Consequently, the demand of SAD, along with interest, penalty, confiscation, and redemption fine, was quashed. CESTAT further held that the extended period under the proviso to s.28 of the Customs Act was not invocable, as there was no deliberate misdeclaration or positive act to evade duty by the appellant.
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the anonymized importer in full and set aside the impugned order-in-original. It held that N/N. 29/2010-Cus is an unconditional exemption from special additional duty, applicable solely on the basis of goods description, and the Dept. cannot read into it conditions not expressly stipulated, including alleged violations of the Legal Metrology Act. CESTAT held that the proper officer, while reassessing differential duty, is bound to extend available exemptions. Consequently, the demand of SAD, along with interest, penalty, confiscation, and redemption fine, was quashed. CESTAT further held that the extended period under the proviso to s.28 of the Customs Act was not invocable, as there was no deliberate misdeclaration or positive act to evade duty by the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
