Tax deduction compliance and payee income recognition govern consultancy disallowance, while no exempt income prevents related expenditure disallowanc...
Derivative abetment liability fails when correctly declared imported components establish no underlying improper importation by the principal importer...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involved a violation of the FEMA Act due to accepting and placing bets on cricket matches for clients. The appellant was linked to the raided premises where incriminating evidence was found. The Appellate Tribunal found the appellant guilty based on evidence, including statements and financial transactions. Penalties were imposed u/s 4 of FEMA and u/s 3(d) of the Act of 1999. The Tribunal reduced the penalties to make them proportionate to the contraventions. The total penalty imposed on the appellant was Rs. 50 lakhs, with Rs. 10 lakhs for u/s 4 and Rs. 40 lakhs for u/s 3(d). The appeal was partly allowed based on the revised penalties.
The case involved a violation of the FEMA Act due to accepting and placing bets on cricket matches for clients. The appellant was linked to the raided premises where incriminating evidence was found. The Appellate Tribunal found the appellant guilty based on evidence, including statements and financial transactions. Penalties were imposed u/s 4 of FEMA and u/s 3(d) of the Act of 1999. The Tribunal reduced the penalties to make them proportionate to the contraventions. The total penalty imposed on the appellant was Rs. 50 lakhs, with Rs. 10 lakhs for u/s 4 and Rs. 40 lakhs for u/s 3(d). The appeal was partly allowed based on the revised penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.