Reasoned rectification orders require consideration of expenditure disclosed in income-tax returns, preventing revision based on incomplete income com...
Modified returns after business reorganisations cannot trigger fresh scrutiny once the original assessment was complete, invalidating related transfer...
Third-party loose sheets require reliable nexus before supporting unexplained expenditure additions; presumptions do not establish payer identity or o...
TNMM comparability using audited accounts and working-capital adjustments can eliminate unwarranted transfer-pricing additions where verified margins ...
Gross-profit additions on disputed purchases require reasoned appellate determination; disclosed claims alone do not support inaccurate-particulars pe...
Limitation after transfer-pricing remand: fresh TPO reference did not extend the assessment deadline, rendering the consequential assessment time-barr...
Interim judicial restraint on tax deduction prevents default, while supporting reasonable cause and penalty deletion for foreign-leg LFC reimbursement...
Palmolein classification defeated the crude-oil concession; material misdeclaration sustained recovery and confiscation, while separate false-document...
Customs officials claim to have received illicit gratification - Clearance of restricted goods without following proper procedures - improper finalization of provisional assessment - The review authority argued that the officials should be penalized for abetting the clearance of restricted goods, but the adjudicating authority disagreed, stating that the evidence did not support such claims. - The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the adjudicating authority's decision. It emphasized the importance of adhering to the charges outlined in the show cause notice and criticized attempts to introduce new allegations during the appeal process.
Customs officials claim to have received illicit gratification - Clearance of restricted goods without following proper procedures - improper finalization of provisional assessment - The review authority argued that the officials should be penalized for abetting the clearance of restricted goods, but the adjudicating authority disagreed, stating that the evidence did not support such claims. - The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the adjudicating authority's decision. It emphasized the importance of adhering to the charges outlined in the show cause notice and criticized attempts to introduce new allegations during the appeal process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.