Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.