Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
For limitation purposes, a dealer's declared date of communication of an adjudication order must be treated as the actual communication date unless the Revenue rebuts it with cogent material. Treating the order date itself as the communication date, despite an unrebutted assertion of later receipt, cannot justify dismissal of the statutory appeal as time-barred. The appellate order was quashed, and the appeal was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh consideration after hearing the parties.
For limitation purposes, a dealer's declared date of communication of an adjudication order must be treated as the actual communication date unless the Revenue rebuts it with cogent material. Treating the order date itself as the communication date, despite an unrebutted assertion of later receipt, cannot justify dismissal of the statutory appeal as time-barred. The appellate order was quashed, and the appeal was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh consideration after hearing the parties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.