Infrastructure-development deduction remains available to EPC contractors when substantive statutory conditions outweigh contractor labels in agreemen...
Explained Investment Sources: documented gifts and traceable salary savings supported deletion of additions for property and mutual-fund SIP investmen...
Internal comparable pricing supports arm's-length interest on compulsorily convertible debentures, preventing their recharacterisation as equity for t...
Nominee director protection shields independent financial-institution appointees from criminal liability where they lack involvement in deposit defaul...
CESTAT Mumbai held that confiscation of imported goods and imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of Customs Act for forged Special Import Licenses lacked clear evidence linking appellants to forgery. Delay in penalty proceedings beyond reasonable time was deemed unjustified, citing legal precedents. The order confiscating goods was upheld, but penalty imposition was deemed unsustainable. Appeal allowed in part, emphasizing lack of strong grounds for penalty imposition u/s 112(a) on appellants.
CESTAT Mumbai held that confiscation of imported goods and imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of Customs Act for forged Special Import Licenses lacked clear evidence linking appellants to forgery. Delay in penalty proceedings beyond reasonable time was deemed unjustified, citing legal precedents. The order confiscating goods was upheld, but penalty imposition was deemed unsustainable. Appeal allowed in part, emphasizing lack of strong grounds for penalty imposition u/s 112(a) on appellants.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
