Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Issuance of Export Obligation Discharge Certificates and discharge of customs bonds defeated the demand for alleged non-fulfilment of export obligation, because the licensing authority had certified compliance and the bond liability had already been released. The diversion allegation also failed since the department's own contemporaneous record showed receipt of the goods by the EOU, making the contrary customs case unsustainable. Transporter statements could not be relied on without examination and cross-examination, and their use violated natural justice. The extended period of limitation was unavailable because suppression or wilful misstatement was not shown. As the substantive allegations failed, confiscation, redemption fine and section 135 action were also held unwarranted.
Issuance of Export Obligation Discharge Certificates and discharge of customs bonds defeated the demand for alleged non-fulfilment of export obligation, because the licensing authority had certified compliance and the bond liability had already been released. The diversion allegation also failed since the department's own contemporaneous record showed receipt of the goods by the EOU, making the contrary customs case unsustainable. Transporter statements could not be relied on without examination and cross-examination, and their use violated natural justice. The extended period of limitation was unavailable because suppression or wilful misstatement was not shown. As the substantive allegations failed, confiscation, redemption fine and section 135 action were also held unwarranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.