Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The Appellate Tribunal addressed undisclosed sales and net profit determination. The CIT(A) limited the addition to the net profit element, with the Revenue arguing for a 12.5% rate instead of 8%. Incriminating material was found during a search at the director's residence, indicating off-the-books sales. The Tribunal ruled that a higher net profit rate must be justified based on business nature and facts, not arbitrarily. The Revenue failed to provide a reasonable basis for the 12.5% rate, and the High Court decision cited did not align with the assessee's activities. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's argument, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision.
The Appellate Tribunal addressed undisclosed sales and net profit determination. The CIT(A) limited the addition to the net profit element, with the Revenue arguing for a 12.5% rate instead of 8%. Incriminating material was found during a search at the director's residence, indicating off-the-books sales. The Tribunal ruled that a higher net profit rate must be justified based on business nature and facts, not arbitrarily. The Revenue failed to provide a reasonable basis for the 12.5% rate, and the High Court decision cited did not align with the assessee's activities. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's argument, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.