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" ?
Refund of duty on export goods was held barred by the doctrine of unjust enrichment where the exporter realised export proceeds above the FOB value declared in the shipping bill. The Tribunal applied the statutory bar and required proof that the duty incidence had not been passed on. As no cogent financial correlation or satisfactory explanation was produced to show that the excess realisation excluded the refund component, and the chartered accountant's certificate did not address this point, a presumption arose that the burden had been passed on. The refund sanction was therefore unsustainable and rejection of the claim was upheld.
Refund of duty on export goods was held barred by the doctrine of unjust enrichment where the exporter realised export proceeds above the FOB value declared in the shipping bill. The Tribunal applied the statutory bar and required proof that the duty incidence had not been passed on. As no cogent financial correlation or satisfactory explanation was produced to show that the excess realisation excluded the refund component, and the chartered accountant's certificate did not address this point, a presumption arose that the burden had been passed on. The refund sanction was therefore unsustainable and rejection of the claim was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.