Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Profits of the SEZ manufacturing unit were excluded from book profit for AY 2011-12 because the withdrawal of the MAT exclusion operated prospectively from 1 April 2012. Disallowance under section 14A was confined to the amount of exempt income. Claims for deduction under section 10AA on alleged SEZ trading and manufacturing activities failed because the assessee did not produce credible evidence that the eligible operations were actually carried on, and exemption conditions had to be strictly proved. The Tribunal also upheld additions for cessation of trading liability under section 41(1) and unexplained sundry creditors under section 68 for want of proof of subsisting liabilities, identity, creditworthiness and genuineness.
Profits of the SEZ manufacturing unit were excluded from book profit for AY 2011-12 because the withdrawal of the MAT exclusion operated prospectively from 1 April 2012. Disallowance under section 14A was confined to the amount of exempt income. Claims for deduction under section 10AA on alleged SEZ trading and manufacturing activities failed because the assessee did not produce credible evidence that the eligible operations were actually carried on, and exemption conditions had to be strictly proved. The Tribunal also upheld additions for cessation of trading liability under section 41(1) and unexplained sundry creditors under section 68 for want of proof of subsisting liabilities, identity, creditworthiness and genuineness.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.