Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
The case before CESTAT Bangalore involved a refund claim for Service Tax paid under protest for Consultancy Services received from abroad under reverse charge mechanism. The respondent deposited the tax, interest, and penalty within the prescribed time period. The absence of evidence showing payments made under protest led to the claim being considered time-barred. The respondent had paid the tax based on an audit letter and had informed the authorities accordingly. As the tax was paid under the relevant provisions without any mistake of law. The decision upheld the provisions of u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appeal by the Revenue was allowed.
The case before CESTAT Bangalore involved a refund claim for Service Tax paid under protest for Consultancy Services received from abroad under reverse charge mechanism. The respondent deposited the tax, interest, and penalty within the prescribed time period. The absence of evidence showing payments made under protest led to the claim being considered time-barred. The respondent had paid the tax based on an audit letter and had informed the authorities accordingly. As the tax was paid under the relevant provisions without any mistake of law. The decision upheld the provisions of u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appeal by the Revenue was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.