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...
CIT(A) determined profit at 5.47% on total purchases. Assessee produced sufficient evidence regarding purchases, movement of goods, GST payment on transportation, expenses accounted for. No evidence of routing back payments. CIT(A) endorsed assessee's contentions but erred in directing gross profit rate application, defying logic. Assessee discharged onus, furnished abundant evidence substantiating purchases' genuineness. CIT(A) erred in sustaining gross profit addition on alleged purchases over declared profit. Gross profit determined by CIT(A) directed to be deleted. Addition u/s 56(2)(x) for difference between purchase price and stamp duty value of property purchased, without referring valuation to DVO, is unsustainable and liable to be deleted. AO bound to refer valuation to DVO when assessee disputes stamp duty value. Addition by AO and confirmation by CIT(A), without DVO reference, unsustainable and deleted in assessee's favor.
CIT(A) determined profit at 5.47% on total purchases. Assessee produced sufficient evidence regarding purchases, movement of goods, GST payment on transportation, expenses accounted for. No evidence of routing back payments. CIT(A) endorsed assessee's contentions but erred in directing gross profit rate application, defying logic. Assessee discharged onus, furnished abundant evidence substantiating purchases' genuineness. CIT(A) erred in sustaining gross profit addition on alleged purchases over declared profit. Gross profit determined by CIT(A) directed to be deleted. Addition u/s 56(2)(x) for difference between purchase price and stamp duty value of property purchased, without referring valuation to DVO, is unsustainable and liable to be deleted. AO bound to refer valuation to DVO when assessee disputes stamp duty value. Addition by AO and confirmation by CIT(A), without DVO reference, unsustainable and deleted in assessee's favor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
