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...
Reassessment initiated under an incorrect and non-operative PAN was treated as a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural lapse, because the assessee had disclosed the transactions under the correct PAN and the reply under section 148A was not considered before issuing notice; the proceedings were also held time-barred. On merits, cash deposits were accepted as business receipts where the books and explanation were unrebutted, and rejection of accounts solely for want of a tax audit was unjustified. The FDR investments were likewise explained from renewal of earlier deposits and the same business receipts, so the addition could not survive and double taxation of the same funds was impermissible.
Reassessment initiated under an incorrect and non-operative PAN was treated as a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural lapse, because the assessee had disclosed the transactions under the correct PAN and the reply under section 148A was not considered before issuing notice; the proceedings were also held time-barred. On merits, cash deposits were accepted as business receipts where the books and explanation were unrebutted, and rejection of accounts solely for want of a tax audit was unjustified. The FDR investments were likewise explained from renewal of earlier deposits and the same business receipts, so the addition could not survive and double taxation of the same funds was impermissible.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
