Business deductions and transfer pricing issues: tribunal treatment of software write-offs, donation receipts, warranty provisions, and related expens...
Equivalent value attachment under money laundering law upheld where received funds were treated as proceeds of crime and prior-acquired property could...
Clandestine removal - it is alleged that respondents have shown excess manufacture in order to avail excess refund to the tune of Rs. 60 lakhs - burden of proof lies with the prosecution or not - The Tribunal acknowledges the serious nature of the charge but finds that the Revenue failed to establish tangible evidence beyond a single test run. They emphasize the necessity of thorough investigation and tangible evidence to prove such allegations conclusively. - The Tribunal notes the various factors affecting fuel consumption and production, concluding that a single test run cannot accurately represent overall production.
Clandestine removal - it is alleged that respondents have shown excess manufacture in order to avail excess refund to the tune of Rs. 60 lakhs - burden of proof lies with the prosecution or not - The Tribunal acknowledges the serious nature of the charge but finds that the Revenue failed to establish tangible evidence beyond a single test run. They emphasize the necessity of thorough investigation and tangible evidence to prove such allegations conclusively. - The Tribunal notes the various factors affecting fuel consumption and production, concluding that a single test run cannot accurately represent overall production.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
