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" ?
Differential customs duty could not be demanded on imported watches merely because authorised dealers later revised the retail sale price after clearance. The Tribunal held that the importer had declared the RSP at import, paid duty on that basis, and the goods were finally assessed without provisional assessment or user conditions; in the absence of evidence that the importer itself altered the RSP or knew of the later revision, rule 5 of the 2008 Rules was wrongly applied to an importer. The director's section 108 statement was also found irrelevant without compliance with section 138B. As the duty demand failed, the penalty under section 114A was also set aside.
Differential customs duty could not be demanded on imported watches merely because authorised dealers later revised the retail sale price after clearance. The Tribunal held that the importer had declared the RSP at import, paid duty on that basis, and the goods were finally assessed without provisional assessment or user conditions; in the absence of evidence that the importer itself altered the RSP or knew of the later revision, rule 5 of the 2008 Rules was wrongly applied to an importer. The director's section 108 statement was also found irrelevant without compliance with section 138B. As the duty demand failed, the penalty under section 114A was also set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
