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" ?
Self-assessed Bills of Entry attain finality unless challenged within the statutory appellate period. The Tribunal held that reassessment under Section 17(5) applies only where departmental verification, examination, testing or similar scrutiny shows the self-assessment to be incorrect; a later allegation of short shipment, raised about two years after clearance, could not reopen a concluded assessment. It further held that refund proceedings cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or as a fresh assessment on merits. Because the importer did not timely challenge the assessment, and any belated challenge was beyond the condonable period, both reassessment and refund were rightly rejected.
Self-assessed Bills of Entry attain finality unless challenged within the statutory appellate period. The Tribunal held that reassessment under Section 17(5) applies only where departmental verification, examination, testing or similar scrutiny shows the self-assessment to be incorrect; a later allegation of short shipment, raised about two years after clearance, could not reopen a concluded assessment. It further held that refund proceedings cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or as a fresh assessment on merits. Because the importer did not timely challenge the assessment, and any belated challenge was beyond the condonable period, both reassessment and refund were rightly rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.