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...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - wrong claim of set off loss - explanation was not found false - no iota of evidence of concealment of any fact relating to particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - Merely because the assessee had claimed the expenditure, which was not accepted or was not acceptable to the revenue, that by itself would not, attract the penalty u/s 271(1)(c)
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - wrong claim of set off loss - explanation was not found false - no iota of evidence of concealment of any fact relating to particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - Merely because the assessee had claimed the expenditure, which was not accepted or was not acceptable to the revenue, that by itself would not, attract the penalty u/s 271(1)(c)
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.