Deductibility for charitable donations affirmed where payments to approved relief funds, even if CSR-driven, qualify under the donation deduction sche...
Mis-declaration in import descriptions must be deliberate to justify confiscation; withheld contemporaneous import documents invalidate value redeterm...
Liability for EPCG export shortfall: duty and interest sustained, but confiscation and penalties quashed where no fraud and causes beyond importer con...
The Tribunal held that the 10% tolerance band under the stamp valuation framework applies retrospectively as a curative measure, so no addition survived where the difference between agreement value and stamp duty value was only 2.3%. It also accepted that indexation of cost for flat allotment rights runs from the date of the agreement, since rights accrued on execution and not from the dates of later instalments, leading to deletion of the recomputed disallowance. For the unexplained investment issue, the Tribunal found factual verification was needed and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer after granting adequate hearing.
The Tribunal held that the 10% tolerance band under the stamp valuation framework applies retrospectively as a curative measure, so no addition survived where the difference between agreement value and stamp duty value was only 2.3%. It also accepted that indexation of cost for flat allotment rights runs from the date of the agreement, since rights accrued on execution and not from the dates of later instalments, leading to deletion of the recomputed disallowance. For the unexplained investment issue, the Tribunal found factual verification was needed and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer after granting adequate hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.