Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Seizure of Gold Bars - Confiscation - Penalty u/s 112(b) - The case involves the interception of the Appellant carrying 17 pieces of gold of foreign origin in Kolkata. Despite not claiming ownership of the gold bars, the Appellant was penalized under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal affirmed the absolute confiscation of the gold bars but reduced the penalty from Rs. 20 Lakhs to Rs. 2 Lakhs, considering the financial circumstances of the Appellant.
Seizure of Gold Bars - Confiscation - Penalty u/s 112(b) - The case involves the interception of the Appellant carrying 17 pieces of gold of foreign origin in Kolkata. Despite not claiming ownership of the gold bars, the Appellant was penalized under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal affirmed the absolute confiscation of the gold bars but reduced the penalty from Rs. 20 Lakhs to Rs. 2 Lakhs, considering the financial circumstances of the Appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4780
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
