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...
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 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
