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" ?
Duty paid under protest in a customs classification dispute became refundable once the classification was finally decided in the importer's favour, and the refund followed as a natural consequence of the adjudication. The Tribunal held that money collected and retained contrary to law could not be kept without compensating the importer by way of interest, especially where the Revenue had enjoyed the benefit of the deposit from the date of import. It rejected the Revenue's reliance on authorities dealing with different factual settings and upheld the appellate order granting interest on the refunded amount, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
Duty paid under protest in a customs classification dispute became refundable once the classification was finally decided in the importer's favour, and the refund followed as a natural consequence of the adjudication. The Tribunal held that money collected and retained contrary to law could not be kept without compensating the importer by way of interest, especially where the Revenue had enjoyed the benefit of the deposit from the date of import. It rejected the Revenue's reliance on authorities dealing with different factual settings and upheld the appellate order granting interest on the refunded amount, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.