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 Zinc-EDTA (EDTA Zinc 12%) is classifiable under CTI 3105 9090 as "other fertilizers" and not under CTI 2922 4990 as proposed by the Department. The Tribunal emphasized that classification is directly linked to chargeability and the burden of proof rests on Revenue when seeking a heading different from that declared by the importer. As no representative samples were tested and the expert opinion relied on by Revenue was based on secondary internet material rather than actual test reports, the Department failed to discharge this burden. Noting the deliberate presence of nitrogen and application of Chapter 31 Note 6, CESTAT set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeal.
CESTAT held that Zinc-EDTA (EDTA Zinc 12%) is classifiable under CTI 3105 9090 as "other fertilizers" and not under CTI 2922 4990 as proposed by the Department. The Tribunal emphasized that classification is directly linked to chargeability and the burden of proof rests on Revenue when seeking a heading different from that declared by the importer. As no representative samples were tested and the expert opinion relied on by Revenue was based on secondary internet material rather than actual test reports, the Department failed to discharge this burden. Noting the deliberate presence of nitrogen and application of Chapter 31 Note 6, CESTAT set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
