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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Delayed adjudication under s. 28(9) of the Customs Act was challenged on the ground that the extension order for deciding the SCN was not communicated, in a dispute over denial of preferential duty exemption based on Certificates of Origin under the ASEAN-India FTA. The Court held that, unlike s. 110(2), s. 28 does not mandate prior intimation or communication of an extension; while intimation is desirable, non-communication is not fatal. Given the failure to file any substantive reply on merits to rebut the verification email questioning the Certificates of Origin, no ground for writ interference was made out; the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal with time to file it. - HC
Delayed adjudication under s. 28(9) of the Customs Act was challenged on the ground that the extension order for deciding the SCN was not communicated, in a dispute over denial of preferential duty exemption based on Certificates of Origin under the ASEAN-India FTA. The Court held that, unlike s. 110(2), s. 28 does not mandate prior intimation or communication of an extension; while intimation is desirable, non-communication is not fatal. Given the failure to file any substantive reply on merits to rebut the verification email questioning the Certificates of Origin, no ground for writ interference was made out; the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal with time to file it. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.