Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
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...
Ad hoc confirmation of one-fifth of an alleged unexplained investment in a flat was found arbitrary where the source of payments was supported by bank transfers, housing finance, accumulated savings from government service, family agricultural income, and the spouse's income; that addition was deleted. The separate addition for the difference between stamp duty value and purchase price was also deleted because the order gave no cogent reason for refusing a valuation reference, relied on the wrong charging provision for the relevant assessment year, and ignored evidence showing demolition action for unauthorised construction, which supported the declared price as the flat's fair market value.
Ad hoc confirmation of one-fifth of an alleged unexplained investment in a flat was found arbitrary where the source of payments was supported by bank transfers, housing finance, accumulated savings from government service, family agricultural income, and the spouse's income; that addition was deleted. The separate addition for the difference between stamp duty value and purchase price was also deleted because the order gave no cogent reason for refusing a valuation reference, relied on the wrong charging provision for the relevant assessment year, and ignored evidence showing demolition action for unauthorised construction, which supported the declared price as the flat's fair market value.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.