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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
The HC held that Notification No. 14/2022-Central Tax amending Rule 89(5) of the CGST Rules had to be applied even to refund applications filed before 5 July 2022, following the final view in Ascent Meditech Ltd. The appellate authority's failure to consider that notification and the related clarification rendered its rejection of the refund claims unsustainable. On a composite reading of Section 54(3) and the Rules, the petitioner was entitled to refund of accumulated input tax credit arising from the inverted duty structure, and the original and appellate rejection orders were quashed.
The HC held that Notification No. 14/2022-Central Tax amending Rule 89(5) of the CGST Rules had to be applied even to refund applications filed before 5 July 2022, following the final view in Ascent Meditech Ltd. The appellate authority's failure to consider that notification and the related clarification rendered its rejection of the refund claims unsustainable. On a composite reading of Section 54(3) and the Rules, the petitioner was entitled to refund of accumulated input tax credit arising from the inverted duty structure, and the original and appellate rejection orders were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
