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 customs broker, setting aside the revocation of licence, forfeiture of security deposit and penalty under CBLR. It held that the alleged violations of Regulations 10(a), 10(d), 10(e) and 10(n) were unsustainable. For Regulation 10(a), there was no evidentiary basis in the SCN to conclude lack of authorization. Findings under Regulations 10(d) and 10(e) were based on statements not relied upon in the SCN and no material showed failure to advise or provision of incorrect information. For Regulation 10(n), the broker had duly verified IEC and GSTIN through authentic documents, and could not be faulted for relying on government-issued credentials.
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the customs broker, setting aside the revocation of licence, forfeiture of security deposit and penalty under CBLR. It held that the alleged violations of Regulations 10(a), 10(d), 10(e) and 10(n) were unsustainable. For Regulation 10(a), there was no evidentiary basis in the SCN to conclude lack of authorization. Findings under Regulations 10(d) and 10(e) were based on statements not relied upon in the SCN and no material showed failure to advise or provision of incorrect information. For Regulation 10(n), the broker had duly verified IEC and GSTIN through authentic documents, and could not be faulted for relying on government-issued credentials.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.