Internal CUP benchmarking for fixed-rate Masala Bonds prevails over floating external comparables, eliminating the related transfer-pricing adjustment...
Jurisdictional validity of revision notices: incorrect official capacity and mere change of opinion invalidate revision of property income assessments...
Bogus-purchase additions are limited to embedded profit where corresponding sales are accepted, while accommodation-entry information can support reas...
FERA penalty quantification must be reasoned, reasonable and proportionate to the contravention; the statutory maximum under Section 50 does not by itself justify the amount imposed. Where certain export-realisation contraventions were excluded and an RBI write-off was noted, retaining the original penalty without explaining its basis was disproportionate. A finding that the penalty was not harsh or excessive, without articulated quantification reasons, was insufficient. The penalty was therefore set aside and redetermined at a lower amount, with the appeal partly allowed.
FERA penalty quantification must be reasoned, reasonable and proportionate to the contravention; the statutory maximum under Section 50 does not by itself justify the amount imposed. Where certain export-realisation contraventions were excluded and an RBI write-off was noted, retaining the original penalty without explaining its basis was disproportionate. A finding that the penalty was not harsh or excessive, without articulated quantification reasons, was insufficient. The penalty was therefore set aside and redetermined at a lower amount, with the appeal partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
