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...
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Error in computing LTCG - Based on the facts, AI ought to have accepted the claim of the assessee that the claim of loss was not intentional. - Moreover, as observed by the CIT(A) reduction in capital loss cannot be considered for imposition of penalty. - Revenue appeal dismissed - HC
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Error in computing LTCG - Based on the facts, AI ought to have accepted the claim of the assessee that the claim of loss was not intentional. - Moreover, as observed by the CIT(A) reduction in capital loss cannot be considered for imposition of penalty. - Revenue appeal dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.