Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
921 to 940 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Appellant failed to discharge service tax liability correctly, suppressed value of taxable services in ST-3 returns. Department relied on 26AS statement providing details of tax deducted/collected at source. Appellant did not cooperate with investigations, failed to substantiate claims. Extended period rightly invoked as per Supreme Court's ruling in Usha Rectifier case where information taken from Balance Sheet. Intent to evade tax established. Penalties u/ss 77(1)(c)(ii), 77(1)(c)(iii) and 78 upheld. No infirmity in impugned order, appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
Appellant failed to discharge service tax liability correctly, suppressed value of taxable services in ST-3 returns. Department relied on 26AS statement providing details of tax deducted/collected at source. Appellant did not cooperate with investigations, failed to substantiate claims. Extended period rightly invoked as per Supreme Court's ruling in Usha Rectifier case where information taken from Balance Sheet. Intent to evade tax established. Penalties u/ss 77(1)(c)(ii), 77(1)(c)(iii) and 78 upheld. No infirmity in impugned order, appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
