Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid where it was based on the same material already examined in the original scrutiny, with no new tangible information, and on an incorrect factual premise that separate research and development accounts were not maintained. The Tribunal treated this as a mere change of opinion after four years and held the jurisdictional assumption bad in law. On merits, it found no multiple deduction: the disputed depreciation was already included in research and development expenditure and had been added back in the income computation, so no further disallowance survived. The appellate authority also could not uphold denial of weighted deduction beyond the reassessment order without enhancement notice.
Reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid where it was based on the same material already examined in the original scrutiny, with no new tangible information, and on an incorrect factual premise that separate research and development accounts were not maintained. The Tribunal treated this as a mere change of opinion after four years and held the jurisdictional assumption bad in law. On merits, it found no multiple deduction: the disputed depreciation was already included in research and development expenditure and had been added back in the income computation, so no further disallowance survived. The appellate authority also could not uphold denial of weighted deduction beyond the reassessment order without enhancement notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
