Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Properties treated as proceeds of crime remained attachable where the appellants failed to prove acquisition from independent lawful sources or payment of consideration. The Appellate Tribunal found that the respondent had established the foundational case that the assets originally stood with M/s AGFVIL and were later transferred through intermediary, namesake transactions without supporting proof of genuine purchase. For one appellant, the record showed only a shifted name without documentary evidence of consideration; for another, alleged loans, seller payment, and bank trail were not substantiated; for the third, the later explanation of source was inconsistent with her own statement and unsupported by material. The confirmation of the provisional attachment was upheld.
Properties treated as proceeds of crime remained attachable where the appellants failed to prove acquisition from independent lawful sources or payment of consideration. The Appellate Tribunal found that the respondent had established the foundational case that the assets originally stood with M/s AGFVIL and were later transferred through intermediary, namesake transactions without supporting proof of genuine purchase. For one appellant, the record showed only a shifted name without documentary evidence of consideration; for another, alleged loans, seller payment, and bank trail were not substantiated; for the third, the later explanation of source was inconsistent with her own statement and unsupported by material. The confirmation of the provisional attachment was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
