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 competency of DRI officers to issue show cause notices in light of the statutory amendment and the SC decision in Canon India (Review), rejecting the appellant's jurisdictional challenge. However, on merits, CESTAT held that the Commissioner (Adjudication) acted beyond the show cause notice by introducing the "merchant exporter" issue at adjudication stage, which is impermissible. Relying on HC precedent in Galaxy Surfactants and CESTAT's decision in Tetrapack, the Tribunal held that a manufacturer-importer may send imported goods for job-work under N/N 30/97 and that non-obtaining of prior permission is only a procedural lapse, not warranting demand of duty. The appeal was allowed.
CESTAT upheld the competency of DRI officers to issue show cause notices in light of the statutory amendment and the SC decision in Canon India (Review), rejecting the appellant's jurisdictional challenge. However, on merits, CESTAT held that the Commissioner (Adjudication) acted beyond the show cause notice by introducing the "merchant exporter" issue at adjudication stage, which is impermissible. Relying on HC precedent in Galaxy Surfactants and CESTAT's decision in Tetrapack, the Tribunal held that a manufacturer-importer may send imported goods for job-work under N/N 30/97 and that non-obtaining of prior permission is only a procedural lapse, not warranting demand of duty. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.