Marketing support and subcontracted client contracts: no agency permanent establishment under Article 5 DTAA; arm's-length pricing bars profit attribu...
Transfer pricing comparables selection and working capital adjustment u/r 10B(1)(e)(iii), remanded for recomputation with rejected comparables include...
Gold, a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act, was recovered from an appellant's personal possession and from concealment in a car; the claim of licit acquisition required the claimants to discharge the statutory reverse burden. As the appellants failed to prove lawful import/possession and relied on belated documents and retraction of statements, the gold was held to be smuggled and liable to confiscation under Section 111, resulting in upholding of absolute confiscation. Their knowing involvement in handling, transportation, and possession justified penalties under Section 112(b); the penalties were held reasonable and not liable to interference. Appeal dismissed - CESTAT
Gold, a notified item under Section 123 of the Customs Act, was recovered from an appellant's personal possession and from concealment in a car; the claim of licit acquisition required the claimants to discharge the statutory reverse burden. As the appellants failed to prove lawful import/possession and relied on belated documents and retraction of statements, the gold was held to be smuggled and liable to confiscation under Section 111, resulting in upholding of absolute confiscation. Their knowing involvement in handling, transportation, and possession justified penalties under Section 112(b); the penalties were held reasonable and not liable to interference. Appeal dismissed - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.