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...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
In writ proceedings, a taxpayer who received a show cause notice alleging wilful suppression and invoking Section 74, but filed no reply, made payment without protest, and accepted before the adjudicating authority that tax, interest and penalty would be paid, was held estopped from taking a contrary stand later. The Court treated the recorded admission and unchallenged adjudication note as decisive, and held that prior voluntary payment after audit detection did not by itself defeat Section 74 where the allegation of suppression remained uncontested. On that basis, no interference under Article 226 was made and the writ challenge failed.
In writ proceedings, a taxpayer who received a show cause notice alleging wilful suppression and invoking Section 74, but filed no reply, made payment without protest, and accepted before the adjudicating authority that tax, interest and penalty would be paid, was held estopped from taking a contrary stand later. The Court treated the recorded admission and unchallenged adjudication note as decisive, and held that prior voluntary payment after audit detection did not by itself defeat Section 74 where the allegation of suppression remained uncontested. On that basis, no interference under Article 226 was made and the writ challenge failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
