Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Levy of penalty u/ss 271D and 271E was challenged - default u/ss 269SS and 269T - assessee received and repaid cash loans from directors and related concerns - assessee contended cash was received to meet urgent expenses at project site when funds were unavailable - argument that cash loans from directors were exempt from sections 269SS and 269T rejected as no such exception exists in statute - limitation argument rejected as proceedings completed within statutory limit - delay due to COVID-19 pandemic excluded - penalty levy inappropriate given assessee's business requiring frequent expenditure at distant project site and possibility of cash loans from directors due to exigency - appeals allowed by deleting penalties.
Levy of penalty u/ss 271D and 271E was challenged - default u/ss 269SS and 269T - assessee received and repaid cash loans from directors and related concerns - assessee contended cash was received to meet urgent expenses at project site when funds were unavailable - argument that cash loans from directors were exempt from sections 269SS and 269T rejected as no such exception exists in statute - limitation argument rejected as proceedings completed within statutory limit - delay due to COVID-19 pandemic excluded - penalty levy inappropriate given assessee's business requiring frequent expenditure at distant project site and possibility of cash loans from directors due to exigency - appeals allowed by deleting penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.