Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
Disciplinary proportionality requires penalties for Authorised Representative misconduct to match proven harm, leading to reconsideration of registrat...
The case involves attachment of immovable property jointly owned by appellant and brothers for government dues recovery. The attachment was done u/r 2(vi) of Rules of 1995 u/s 156 r/w. 142 of Customs Act, 1962. The property share is 20% appellant's and 80% brothers'. As partnership firm liability is joint u/s 25 of Indian Partnership Act, attaching entire property for firm's dues is improper. Interest u/s 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 not applicable pre-enactment. As dues paid, property attachment set aside, appeal allowed.
The case involves attachment of immovable property jointly owned by appellant and brothers for government dues recovery. The attachment was done u/r 2(vi) of Rules of 1995 u/s 156 r/w. 142 of Customs Act, 1962. The property share is 20% appellant's and 80% brothers'. As partnership firm liability is joint u/s 25 of Indian Partnership Act, attaching entire property for firm's dues is improper. Interest u/s 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 not applicable pre-enactment. As dues paid, property attachment set aside, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
