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...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95714 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty u/s 271D - period of limitation - CIT(A) took the date on which the one year period from the end of the financial year in which the notice was issued as 31/03/2022. - We are unable to understand where from this date has come. Expiry of one year is not relatable to this date either from the date of the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 or from the date of issuance of notice u/s 271D of the Act, initiating the proceedings. - AT
Penalty u/s 271D - period of limitation - CIT(A) took the date on which the one year period from the end of the financial year in which the notice was issued as 31/03/2022. - We are unable to understand where from this date has come. Expiry of one year is not relatable to this date either from the date of the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 or from the date of issuance of notice u/s 271D of the Act, initiating the proceedings. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
