Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Levy of penalty u/s 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act - detention of yacht - suspicion of foul play - evasion of Customs Duty - The initial burden to prove proper importation, under Section 123 ibid. was on the notices, some of whom have accepted the liability and thereby resulting in the non-discharge of the burden. The natural consequence which flows from the above is that the burden cast on the notices remained un-discharged and hence, they have to suffer consequence, namely the penalties in this case. This is because, they have all been identified to be part of different sides but of the same transaction. - AT
Levy of penalty u/s 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act - detention of yacht - suspicion of foul play - evasion of Customs Duty - The initial burden to prove proper importation, under Section 123 ibid. was on the notices, some of whom have accepted the liability and thereby resulting in the non-discharge of the burden. The natural consequence which flows from the above is that the burden cast on the notices remained un-discharged and hence, they have to suffer consequence, namely the penalties in this case. This is because, they have all been identified to be part of different sides but of the same transaction. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.