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...
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 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
