Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
Penalty u/s 78 of the FA, 1994 - appellant had correctly advised not to challenged the invocation of the extended period of limitation for recovery of service tax though the parameters/conditions for imposing equivalent penalty u/s 78 is same - appellant after having recovered the service tax from its customer had not paid over the amount to the State clearly point to mala fide conduct - penalty upheld
Penalty u/s 78 of the FA, 1994 - appellant had correctly advised not to challenged the invocation of the extended period of limitation for recovery of service tax though the parameters/conditions for imposing equivalent penalty u/s 78 is same - appellant after having recovered the service tax from its customer had not paid over the amount to the State clearly point to mala fide conduct - penalty upheld
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.