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, holding the appellant eligible for benefit under the VCES. It held that service tax deposited prior to the formal enactment and prior to acknowledgment of the declaration could be treated as payment towards "tax dues" under the scheme, given its beneficial and voluntary-compliance objective. The Tribunal applied purposive interpretation, preferring substantive rights over procedural technicalities, and concluded that the appellant had duly complied with statutory requirements. Consequently, rejection of the VCES-I declaration by the Designated Authority was found unsustainable, the impugned order was set aside, and the declaration was held valid with consequential reliefs.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding the appellant eligible for benefit under the VCES. It held that service tax deposited prior to the formal enactment and prior to acknowledgment of the declaration could be treated as payment towards "tax dues" under the scheme, given its beneficial and voluntary-compliance objective. The Tribunal applied purposive interpretation, preferring substantive rights over procedural technicalities, and concluded that the appellant had duly complied with statutory requirements. Consequently, rejection of the VCES-I declaration by the Designated Authority was found unsustainable, the impugned order was set aside, and the declaration was held valid with consequential reliefs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.