Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Section 122(1A) is construed to cover "any person" other than the taxable person where that person retained the benefit of the contravening transactions and acted at whose instance they were done; on that basis, partners of a firm can be proceeded against if those factual conditions are recorded. The provision is treated as complementary to Section 122(1), not as creating a new independent offence, so it may apply to transactions predating 1 January 2021 if the show-cause notice was issued after the provision came into force. The writ challenge was rejected, while the petitioners were left free to contest the factual findings before the Appellate Tribunal.
Section 122(1A) is construed to cover "any person" other than the taxable person where that person retained the benefit of the contravening transactions and acted at whose instance they were done; on that basis, partners of a firm can be proceeded against if those factual conditions are recorded. The provision is treated as complementary to Section 122(1), not as creating a new independent offence, so it may apply to transactions predating 1 January 2021 if the show-cause notice was issued after the provision came into force. The writ challenge was rejected, while the petitioners were left free to contest the factual findings before the Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.