Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Levy of penalty u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Smuggling - The reason for imposing the impugned penalty is that the appellant has not verified the Let Export Order before the goods reached the loading area. As it is established that it is the appellant who had frustrated the attempt to smuggle the prohibited goods, the penalty imposed under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot sustain and requires to be set aside- AT
Levy of penalty u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Smuggling - The reason for imposing the impugned penalty is that the appellant has not verified the Let Export Order before the goods reached the loading area. As it is established that it is the appellant who had frustrated the attempt to smuggle the prohibited goods, the penalty imposed under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot sustain and requires to be set aside- AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.