Additional evidence in departmental appeals may include show-cause-notice material without introducing a new case where it merely corroborates existin...
Reasoned rectification orders require consideration of expenditure disclosed in income-tax returns, preventing revision based on incomplete income com...
Modified returns after business reorganisations cannot trigger fresh scrutiny once the original assessment was complete, invalidating related transfer...
Third-party loose sheets require reliable nexus before supporting unexplained expenditure additions; presumptions do not establish payer identity or o...
TNMM comparability using audited accounts and working-capital adjustments can eliminate unwarranted transfer-pricing additions where verified margins ...
Gross-profit additions on disputed purchases require reasoned appellate determination; disclosed claims alone do not support inaccurate-particulars pe...
Limitation after transfer-pricing remand: fresh TPO reference did not extend the assessment deadline, rendering the consequential assessment time-barr...
Interim judicial restraint on tax deduction prevents default, while supporting reasonable cause and penalty deletion for foreign-leg LFC reimbursement...
Writ jurisdiction does not ordinarily permit resolution of disputed facts concerning the presence of a Customs Broker during sampling of seized imported industrial oil. The objection to the first sample depended on a factual dispute: the importer denied the representative's presence, while the respondents and sampling report recorded it. The representative's presence during subsequent sampling was admitted. The relevant test report also indicated that the declared industrial oil failed applicable parameters, an issue addressed in an earlier decision. The challenge to seizure was therefore rejected, with no interference warranted on the disputed sampling objection.
Writ jurisdiction does not ordinarily permit resolution of disputed facts concerning the presence of a Customs Broker during sampling of seized imported industrial oil. The objection to the first sample depended on a factual dispute: the importer denied the representative's presence, while the respondents and sampling report recorded it. The representative's presence during subsequent sampling was admitted. The relevant test report also indicated that the declared industrial oil failed applicable parameters, an issue addressed in an earlier decision. The challenge to seizure was therefore rejected, with no interference warranted on the disputed sampling objection.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4894 
