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" ?
Central issue: whether administrative findings of breaches of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations (10(d), 10(e), 10(m), 10(f), 13(12)) and consequent penalty/forfeiture could stand where they rested on recorded statements. Reasoning: recorded statements under section 108 were neither admitted as evidence nor were declarants summoned/examined, and therefore are irrelevant under section 138D and inadmissible under section 138B; the statements were also not relied upon in the show-cause notice. Outcome: findings of regulatory violation and attendant penalty/forfeiture are unsustainable and the impugned order is set aside. - CESTAT
Central issue: whether administrative findings of breaches of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations (10(d), 10(e), 10(m), 10(f), 13(12)) and consequent penalty/forfeiture could stand where they rested on recorded statements. Reasoning: recorded statements under section 108 were neither admitted as evidence nor were declarants summoned/examined, and therefore are irrelevant under section 138D and inadmissible under section 138B; the statements were also not relied upon in the show-cause notice. Outcome: findings of regulatory violation and attendant penalty/forfeiture are unsustainable and the impugned order is set aside. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.